From shekhar at crit.org.in Fri Sep 3 12:20:29 2004 From: shekhar at crit.org.in (Shekhar Krishnan) Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2004 12:20:29 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Re: the recombined manifesto In-Reply-To: <20040827111248.21463.qmail@webmail18.rediffmail.com> References: <20040827111248.21463.qmail@webmail18.rediffmail.com> Message-ID: <8AF02418-FD75-11D8-BFB8-000A95A05D12@crit.org.in> Dear Vaibhav: Manifestos are usually statements of movements and other kinds of collectives, and while written by individuals, are meant to articulate more than just one person's positions. This is the problem with the recombined manifesto. Who is the "we" you keep invoking except for yourself? Your rationalisation of Sunil's comment about the economies of refurbished machinery, that it "complies" with the manifesto ;-) ha! is pure and simple Stalinism. Best S.K. On 27 Aug 2004, at 16.42, VAIbhaV wrote: Dear everyone, This is the first time I'm on the list and I apologize to some of you for the late reply. I only checked mail today. Sunil quoted: Woah. So should I stop working to put Linux on refurbished computers? No that’s certainly not what i am trying to say and I do realize that the statement is very open ended for various interpretations. Infact Sunil, having refurbished computers running microsoft would be ill! Your act of "reconfiguring" the machine by installing linux makes perfect sense and duly complies with the manifesto ;-) ha! This is exactly what I am trying to say but I think I don’t say it very well. I had anticipated a response such as yours but went ahead by keeping that statement in. Here is part of another response that I received from Pallavi Raina and I think its also on these lines that I made that statement: Technology in and of itself isn't a bad thing. Technology in the hands of a global economic system hell bent on destroying everything and everyone in its path and turning us into a Third World full of serfs certainly is, but technology isn't. So i guess it's all about whose "hands" it is in or rather whose hands we are ready to submit our work to (the community or the "vested"). In many ways it is also about every individual working with ICT and social development being his/her own evaluator of his/her work and the implications that arise from it. But i do agree that this manifesto is full of jargon and comments on territory I haven't fully explored (who has?) but should that stop me from searching and expressing? If yes, then what would you call a "process of learning" or "discovery” or "iteration"? In response to Pallavi: Yes i would certainly want to read the book you have recommended but would also add that I will never know "enough"(i dont know about you though! :) ). It's only that i have to keep working at it. Thanks a lot for the mail it has helped me think further. I apologize if this sounds extremely preachy but i dont intend to. Do let me know if i have done a good job on PR considering that this is my first post on any of the lists (in case I annoyed some people with the manifesto) :) For now the only other :) thing i would like to say is that this working document is amendable and infact it would be great to see other versions or further "recombinations" of it (i.e if you find it worth the effort). Thankyou all Vaibhav Bhawsar Student of Communication Design Srishti, Bangalore ----------------------------------------------------------------------- The recombined manifesto 12:58 PM 8/20/2004 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~ In this world every individual has been coded, encrypted and protected. He is so because he has been immunized. Immunized so that he is complacent, acquiescent and private. He fears what rules him. This manifesto and the acts arising from it intend to be malicious and malignant to that very individual's codification. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~ We are artists, craftsmen, designers, musicians, writers, engineers, lawyers, philosophers and economists, and are essentially dreamers. Our acts arise from the dream space and notions of a perfect world. We believe its necessary to operate from such notions and spaces that are non-rational, poetic, and irreducible because we believe in the transitory state of both the world and its ideas. We believe in the subjective individual over the objective and complacent one. We believe ones personal feelings and opinions can have profound influences on the community and also bring temporariness to ideas and beliefs floating within the community by challenging and debating over the consensus. Whatever code we hack, be it myths, cultures, traditions, rituals, beliefs or language - we hack the new out of the old. With the old we produce new worlds or new things that are not always great things, or even good things, but new things. We believe division and distribution of information is a fundamental act of extending knowledge and we situate such acts and their preservation in open and unconditional frameworks. We continuously hack our path thorough existing flows of information and topography created by the institutions, the state and establishments to embrace such spaces with our acts that produce alternative processes of knowledge creation and exchange. We reclaim the information space by providing autonomous free platforms and networks for communication. We liberate information itself. We reclaim the public space as a place of choice and expression through fearless speech. We reconstruct the idea of the chowpal, the piazza and the agora as a place for the people and by the people. We disown all efforts that propagate technology specifically ICT in the name of social development across developing nations. We consider such efforts as pretentious and having vested interests. We are not an economy for the refurbished. We camouflage using contradiction. We visit both the sides, we walk black and white through the grey. We constantly reconfigure ourselves through contradiction and contradistinction. To us originality is a far gone concept. There is no individual creator today. We all are part of the remix machine called globalization, a meme in itself. We are the remix culture. We copy, recombine and re-present memetically. ***_______________________________________________ commons-law mailing list commons-law at sarai.net https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/commons-law _____ Shekhar Krishnan 9, Supriya, 2nd Floor Plot 709, Parsee Colony Road no.4 Dadar, Mumbai 400014 India http://www.crit.org.in/members/shekhar From shekhar at crit.org.in Fri Sep 3 18:07:47 2004 From: shekhar at crit.org.in (Shekhar Krishnan) Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2004 18:07:47 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Re: the recombined manifesto In-Reply-To: <8AF02418-FD75-11D8-BFB8-000A95A05D12@crit.org.in> References: <20040827111248.21463.qmail@webmail18.rediffmail.com> <8AF02418-FD75-11D8-BFB8-000A95A05D12@crit.org.in> Message-ID: <0FC15B5A-FDA6-11D8-BFB8-000A95A05D12@crit.org.in> Dear commons-law list members: I made a mistake in sending this to the list, I meant to send it directly to Vaibhav. I work at Srishti School where Vaibhav is completing his diploma project, and this was a private message. Thanks, S.K. On 3 Sep 2004, at 12.20, Shekhar Krishnan wrote: Dear Vaibhav: Manifestos are usually statements of movements and other kinds of collectives, and while written by individuals, are meant to articulate more than just one person's positions. This is the problem with the recombined manifesto. Who is the "we" you keep invoking except for yourself? Your rationalisation of Sunil's comment about the economies of refurbished machinery, that it "complies" with the manifesto ;-) ha! is pure and simple Stalinism. Best S.K. _____ Shekhar Krishnan 9, Supriya, 2nd Floor Plot 709, Parsee Colony Road no.4 Dadar, Mumbai 400014 India http://www.crit.org.in/members/shekhar From eye at ranadasgupta.com Sun Sep 5 18:18:01 2004 From: eye at ranadasgupta.com (Rana Dasgupta) Date: Sun, 05 Sep 2004 18:18:01 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Scientific publishing Message-ID: <413B0B01.5080608@ranadasgupta.com> Access all areas Aug 5th 2004 From The Economist print edition Scientific publishing is having to change rapidly to respond to growing pressure for free access to published research IN A letter penned in 1676, Isaac Newton famously wrote, “If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.” Although it is debatable whether Newton was being modest or making a barbed comment towards his correspondent (a competitor of short stature) the phrase epitomises views of how science progresses—with the speedy and open publishing of discoveries so that others may make use of them to push back the frontiers of human understanding. For centuries, printed journals destined for university libraries have been the focus of this publishing activity. The winds of change, though, are sweeping through these quiet and dusty corridors. Because of the internet, cost and distance are no longer barriers to providing the results of research to more than just a restricted and privileged few. This is leading people to ask why those results are not, in fact, freely available to all. An impressive industry has built itself around the dissemination of academic research—particularly scientific work. There are over 2,000 publishers in what is called STM (scientific, technological and medical) publishing alone. Together, they publish 1.2m articles a year in about 16,000 periodical journals. It is a huge success. Not everyone, though, is entirely satisfied. Academics, universities and governments are worried that publishers have grown a little too fat and happy. Serial killers The problem is one of monopoly. Of course, publishing itself is an industry with few barriers to entry. That is not the issue. But certain journals are able to capture a lion's share of the important papers because researchers want their papers published in the most prestigious ones. Some titles have acquired exceptional cachet over the years. Such is their prestige that a researcher can win tenure, promotion or a research grant on the basis of a single article in the right publication. That means the publishers of those journals have the pick of the best papers, reinforcing their reputations in a positive feedback loop. They also claim copyright over what they publish, reinforcing their monopoly. So if you want to read an important paper (or an unimportant one for that matter) you have no legal choice but to pay the publisher for it. The upshot is that university libraries must purchase the leading titles, almost whatever their price, and often at the expense of carrying less-exalted works. Owning a prestigious journal has thus become a lucrative business, which many people believe is being abused. Cornell University, for example, recently reviewed its policies on journal acquisition. In the course of that review it noted that between 1986 and 2001 the library budget at its main campus in Ithaca, New York, increased by 149%. The number of periodicals purchased, however, grew by only 5%. Governments, whose funds ultimately pay for a lot of the journals on the shelves of university libraries, are noticing too. A report published in July by Britain's House of Commons Science and Technology Committee found that the average price of an academic journal in Britain rose by 58% between 1998 and 2003, while the retail price index rose by 11% in that period, and scientific output rose by 20%. The report added that profits in the industry were exceptional, singling out Reed Elsevier, a British publisher whose Dutch subsidiary, Elsevier, is the market leader in STM publishing, for having profits “as much as 34% at the operating level”. Indeed, Elsevier has attracted criticism from a number of quarters. Cornell's reviewers, for example, observed that in the previous decade Elsevier's annual price increases on its titles had often been over 10%—and occasionally over 20%. Arie Jongejan, CEO of Elsevier's science and technology division, defends his firm's profits, pointing out that after tax and depreciation, last year's profit margins were 17%, not as high as some claim. But that is still a hefty whack. He justifies such margins on the grounds that the firm's journals are publishing more papers each year and also because high profitability is necessary in order to ensure the sustainability of those journals. Free for all? But the dominance of Elsevier and its kin is under attack. The House of Commons Science and Technology Committee did more than just lament the rising price of journals. It told the British government that the country's universities should be required to ensure that all their research papers are available free online, and that government-funded research grants ought to include free access to the findings a condition of the awards. The government will respond next month. American politicians, too, are getting cross. Earlier this month the House of Representatives' Committee on Appropriations approved a provision in a bill that backs open access to material published by the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The committee expressed concern at the lack of public access to research findings, and at the rising price of journals. These, it commented, were “contrary to the best interests of the US taxpayers who paid for this research”. If the Senate approves the recommendation, it will become law and the NIH will be required to deposit research funded by the agency into an online government archive called PubMed Central within six months of publication in any journal. If this happens, it will be significant, since NIH-funded work amounts to 50,000 papers a year. Even mainland Europe is getting in on the act. In October 2003, the leading research associations of Germany, France and Switzerland signed what has become known as the “Berlin Declaration”—another call for free access to research findings. One of the groups behind the declaration, Germany's Max Planck Society, is now changing its employment contracts to require staff to return the copyright of their work to the society. At the moment it gets assigned to the publishers. Although the society's researchers will still be able to publish in journals, their work must eventually be put into an online repository. In response to the Berlin Declaration, the European Commission has begun a study of the scientific-publishing market—looking at price, access to published papers, and copyright. Because 41% of scientific papers originate in Europe (compared with 31% in America), the results of this study could have a big effect on the publishing industry. One way of addressing the concerns of politicians and university libraries is the promotion of journals in which the author pays to be published. Many new online journals are attempting to do this, using electronic publication to cut their costs. The results are then made available free to readers. BioMed Central, based in Britain, is one such publisher. The company, which was established in 1999, has not yet broken even. But Deborah Cockerill, the firm's assistant publisher, says it is likely to do so soon, as it is growing fast. The number of articles it publishes has doubled every year. In America, a not-for-profit organisation called the Public Library of Science is employing a similar business model. Another possibility is to generalise the House of Representatives' proposal for American medical research and allow the traditional journals a limited period of monopoly—say six months—after which they have to make all taxpayer-funded content available free online. Understandably, the traditional publishers are not too happy about these ideas, although some of them are moving pre-emptively towards the free-after-six-months model of the future. Barbara Meredith, vice-president of professional and scholarly publishing at the Association of American Publishers, a trade group, has said that a demand for open access to research findings could undermine the sustainability of the publishing industry, and has promised to lobby vigorously against this happening. At the moment, the entire open access literature is tiny—less than 1% of what is published according to the Public Library of Science. But if governments were to insist that the results of research they fund must be published in an open-access way, that would change completely. The days of huge profits would then be numbered. Prestige has its uses—and the open-access journals will, no doubt, establish a pecking-order among themselves fairly quickly. But for prestige at any price, time is probably up. From mrinalinikpillai at gmail.com Mon Sep 6 10:52:40 2004 From: mrinalinikpillai at gmail.com (Mrinalini Kochupillai) Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2004 10:52:40 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Patents as a retaliatory weapon In-Reply-To: <20040902063007.90E6B28E782@mail.sarai.net> References: <20040902063007.90E6B28E782@mail.sarai.net> Message-ID: COMMENTS? "PATENTS AS A RETALIATORY WEAPON" SWAMINOMICS/SWAMINATHAN S ANKLESARIA AIYAR Times of India [ SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 05, 2004 12:39:27 AM ] at: http://www.kniff.de/cgi-bin/cgiproxy/nph-proxy.cgi/010110A/http/timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/839493.cms During the Uruguay Round talks on trade in the early 1990s, India fought tooth and nail against two new trade rules proposed for the World Trade Organisation. One was to make intellectual property rights (patents, copyright, trade marks) an integral part of world trade for the first time. The second was to permit cross-retaliation: if a country failed to observe patent rights of the US or EU, those rich countries could retaliate in some other field like trade, by imposing tariffs. These provisions, said Indian trade officials, would be used to hit poor countries on the head, with no reciprocal benefit for them. Dead wrong. These two provisions have, for the first time, given India real weapons against rich countries that flout WTO rules. These weapons can be used in the trade dispute that India has won just this week. The WTO has ruled illegal an outrageous US law (the Byrd amendment) that pays anti-dumping duties on imports to US complainant companies, not the US government. This double dose of protectionism contravenes WTO rules. Eight countries including India had complained, and the WTO has now upheld their complaint. Under WTO rules, India can now levy retaliatory tariffs against US exports. But this will not serve India's interests. Additional duties on US goods will make imports more expensive, penalising innocent Indian consumers. Moreover, raising the price of US goods will encourage commercial rivals of the US to increase their prices to India too. Finally, India is such a small market that Indian retaliation will barely hurt rich countries or make them change their minds. So, while WTO rules allow trade retaliation, such retaliation is in practice impractical for poor countries. It amounts to shooting yourself in the foot. Is there any way out? Yes indeed, thanks to the new rules introduced by the Uruguay Round. Instead of levying additional duties on US goods, India can retaliate by reducing intellectual property rights (IPR) for US goods and services. This will penalise the US while actually helping Indian consumers by bringing down prices. This can threaten US companies with substantial damage, and so be a powerful trade tool. The legality of such retaliation will raise issues of both international and domestic law. According to WTO rules, any retaliation should preferably be in the same sector as the offence. For example, retaliation against an offence in textile trade should preferably be in textiles too. If that is not feasible, the retaliation should be in some other traded goods. Only as a last resort is cross-retaliation allowed in IPR. Can India claim this last resort? This issue was tested recently when Ecuador retaliated against an illegal trade practice of the European Union (tariff preferences for banana imports from former French and British colonies). Ecuador proposed retaliation in industrial design patents, music copyright and geographical indications (such as champagne and cognac). The EU objected to such cross-retaliation in IPR. However, in a recent judgement, the WTO has upheld Ecuador's approach. This sets a useful precedent for India. After 2005, India will have to conform fully with the international IPR regime, especially in patents. But the WTO verdict on Ecuador opens the door for India to breach IPR rules as a form of trade retaliation. However, India will first have to overcome a domestic legal hurdle, emphasised by economist Arvind Subramanian in a recent book India and the WTO. Indian IPR laws do not provide for the selective withdrawal of IPR protection for the goods and services of any one country. Hence India needs to amend its own IPR laws. This should not be difficult. A Presidential ordinance with the required amendments can be issued quickly, and later ratified by Parliament. Exactly what form should such retaliation take? A tempting but bad approach will be to stop the grant of fresh patents for US drugs, or to issue compulsory licences to Indian companies to reverse-engineer and manufacture newly patented American drugs. Indian companies will be hesitant to do the required R&D for fear that India may lose its case in the WTO after a few years, so their efforts will go waste. Effective retaliation needs to be quickly profitable. Suspending music and video copyright for US firms will achieve instant success in retaliation. Patent protection can be suspended for drugs that have less than three years to expire: in such cases the patents will run out before the legal dispute is settled, so Indian drug companies can embark on R&D with confidence. Such cross-retaliation in IPR can really hurt giant US com-panies like Pfizer (drugs), Disney (videos) and Time Warner (music). This can persuade the US Congress to scrap protection-ist laws like the Byrd amend-ment. Thanks to IPR, India at last has real trade weapons, not just toy guns. Mr Kamal Nath, please note. From trupthi at hotmail.com Mon Sep 6 18:20:52 2004 From: trupthi at hotmail.com (trupthi ....) Date: Mon, 06 Sep 2004 12:50:52 +0000 Subject: [Commons-Law] a thought.. Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/commons-law/attachments/20040906/818fc058/attachment.html From shamnadbasheer at yahoo.co.in Tue Sep 7 19:10:26 2004 From: shamnadbasheer at yahoo.co.in (=?iso-8859-1?q?Shamnad=20Basheer?=) Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 14:40:26 +0100 (BST) Subject: [Commons-Law] Re: keystones and innovation In-Reply-To: <8AF02418-FD75-11D8-BFB8-000A95A05D12@crit.org.in> Message-ID: <20040907134026.4937.qmail@web8409.mail.in.yahoo.com> interesting argument. as for its being an objective one-well.. read on... shamnad When This Book Argued for Shift in Antitrust Policy, Its Subject Smiled By STEVE LOHR Published: September 6, 2004 The Keystone Advantage," a business book published two weeks ago, is creating an admiring stir within the not-inconsiderable cottage industry of academics and consultants who study innovation, competition and corporate strategy. It also comes with a recommendation from one of its chief subjects: Bill Gates of Microsoft. The book - by Marco Iansiti, a professor at the Harvard Business School, and Roy Levien, a technology consultant - looks at markets and competition through the prism of biology, especially the "keystones" (species or companies) that serve as the hubs of biological or economic ecosystems. But the most provocative part of the book is the argument that antitrust policy needs to be rethought. Keystone companies, they say, are powerful yet benevolent. They never dominate industries, the authors insist, but enable larger economic ecosystems to thrive. There are other well-known keystone companies like Wal-Mart and eBay, the authors write, but the archetype is Microsoft. "Gates and Microsoft pursued what may have been the most successful keystone strategy of all time," the authors say. "We believe that it is essential for the health and vigor of our economy that the crucial roles played by these organizations be safeguarded and reinforced." Little wonder then that "The Keystone Advantage" seems to have been warmly received at Microsoft. The blurb on the book's front cover comes from Mr. Gates: "This is an important book that should be read by anyone interested in the dynamics of modern business." In an interview, Mr. Iansiti said: "Ours is a fairly different perspective. And I don't think antitrust policy is going to change overnight, but I would like to see our perspective become part of the thinking." The authors are not necessarily disinterested parties on the subject of Microsoft. Mr. Levien worked there for several years, and he and Mr. Iansiti have done consulting for Microsoft and other technology companies. Mr. Iansiti said he had advised Microsoft on antitrust matters. He recently testified for the Justice Department in its challenge to the proposed takeover of PeopleSoft by Oracle, a Microsoft rival. Microsoft, Mr. Iansiti said, should not be beyond antitrust scrutiny, and he pointed out that his research centered on "the broader role Microsoft plays." STEVE LOHR ________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your life partner online Go to: http://yahoo.shaadi.com/india-matrimony From shekhar at crit.org.in Thu Sep 9 01:55:33 2004 From: shekhar at crit.org.in (Shekhar Krishnan) Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 01:55:33 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Re: scientific publishing In-Reply-To: <413B0B01.5080608@ranadasgupta.com> References: <413B0B01.5080608@ranadasgupta.com> Message-ID: <3C2F13C7-01D5-11D9-9A5C-000A95A05D12@crit.org.in> Dear All: The Economist article which Rana sent is rather limited when considered in the context of academic publishing and university libraries in India, and the different stakes that local scientists might have in the open access movement. See the interesting article by Subbiah Arunachalam below. The same site has an excellent guide to open access publishing and self-archiving, with all the key documents and resources, at http://www.scidev.net/sciencepublishing/ Has there been any discussion of the Berlin Declaration on Open Access on this list (I am a newcomer)? http://www.zim.mpg.de/openaccess-berlin/berlindeclaration.html Best S.K. _____ India's march towards open access Subbiah Arunachalam 5 March 2004 Subbiah Arunachalam argues that the best way to make scientific research more available worldwide is to encourage scientists to self-archive their research. http://www.scidev.net/Opinions/index.cfm? fuseaction=readOpinions&itemid=243&language=1 In December 2003, the Indian National Science Academy (INSA) held a one-day conference on access to scientific data and information as part of its annual meeting in Pune. The conference was held to address two key problems faced by Indian scientists — poor access to international journals and the low visibility of papers published by Indian scientists — and the possible solutions offered by electronic publishing and open archives. Inaugurating the conference, Raghunath A. Mashelkar, director-general of India's Council of Scientific & Industrial Research, spoke of how international organisations such as the World Health Organisation (WHO) and the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) were helping developing countries improve electronic access to expensive journals through the HINARI and AGORA programmes, respectively. Unfortunately, however, India has not benefited from either of these programmes. Although journal publishers are willing to provide toll-free electronic access to researchers in countries where relatively few scientists read their journals, they are not prepared to do so in larger developing countries such as India, where they already have a considerable number of subscribers. Yet India's average gross domestic product (GDP) is, per capita, less than half the threshold agreed upon by the WHO and FAO when they set up the HINARI and AGORA programmes. A radical response So scientists in such countries need to find a more radical response by harnessing the new opportunities provided by information and communication technologies (ICTs). We need to break away from the existing model of publishing and communicating scientific knowledge. One way of doing this is to embrace the 'open-access' approach being promoted by the Budapest Open Access Initiative with its two complementary strategies of setting up interoperable open archives and promoting open-access journals. Several Indian publishers have already adopted the open-access philosophy for the electronic versions of their journals. Unlike some open-access journals in other countries, in which authors pay to publish their papers, Indian open-access journals use government grants and subscriptions to their print version to cover publishing costs. All 10 journals of the Indian Academy of Sciences, for example, as well as the four journals of INSA are open-access journals. In fact, INSA has already produced free-access electronic versions of back volumes for all its journals, and the Indian Academy of Sciences is also attempting a similar 'retro-digitisation'. The Journal of the Indian Institute of Science is also available in this form back to its very first issue, published in 1914. The Indian Medlars Centre of the National Informatics Centre, New Delhi, is bringing out electronic versions of 22 biomedical journals, all of them accessible without subscription. The Medlars Centre also has an online bibliographic database, www.indmed.nic.in, providing titles and abstracts of articles from 77 Indian biomedical journals. Medknow Publications, a small company based in Mumbai, has helped 10 medical journals — including the Journal of Post Graduate Medicine and Neurology India — make the transition from print to electronic open access and all of them are doing much better now than before. In addition, some Indian open-access journals are using international agencies such as Bioline, a not-for-profit electronic publishing service for developing countries, and JournalServer.org, an online library of academic journals, to gain greater visibility. However, open-access publishing needs to be complemented by setting up interoperable institutional archives, which allow researchers to make versions of their articles publicly available online both before and after publication. An additional attraction of such archives is that they would raise the profile of Indian research. At present, research originating in an Indian laboratory and published in expensive journals all too often goes unnoticed, even by other researchers in India. Creating institutional archives of such work would help to integrate it into the global knowledge base, to reduce the isolation of our scientists and to improve opportunities for funding and international collaboration. The clear advantages offered by institutional archiving over the present publishing system, in which many research papers are held in the back issues of journals controlled by commercial  (and some society) publishers in other countries, suggests that the government should have an interest in ensuring its success. India's University Grants Commission, for example, should insist that major universities with a large output of science and technology papers set up institutional archives. Other funding agencies — such as the Department of Science & Technology, Department of Scientific & Industrial Research, Department of Biotechnology, Department of Atomic Energy, Department of Space, Indian Council of Agricultural Research and Indian Council of Medical Research — should also insist that research papers resulting from work supported by their funds be made available through open-access archives and toll-free journals. India is not the only country being drawn towards open access. In China — for example, among officials of the National Natural Science Foundation and the Institute of Scientific and Technical Information in China, as well as researchers with the Chinese Academy of Sciences — there is already significant interest in its benefits to the country's scientists.  Reflecting this interest, in mid-June 2004 China will hold a major national conference on open access in cooperation with the US National Academy of Sciences. And in the last week of June, the Eighth International Conference on Electronic Publishing will take place in Brasilia. The first phase of the World Summit on the Information Society, held last December, has given a considerable boost to these efforts: the WSIS Declaration of Principles and Plan of Action include strong statements in favour of open access to scientific literature. UN secretary-general Kofi Annan has also offered his support. Nurturing the network International action is one thing, but genuine free access is another. It will need a champion (or champions) in every institution to promote the creation of institutional archives, and persuade scientists to place their papers in them.  Free access also requires adequate hardware and connectivity. Many universities and research institutions in the developing world lack both computers and high bandwidth Internet connectivity, so part of the strategy of open-access proponents must include campaigning for improved ICT facilities. Luckily, costs of both hardware and Internet bandwidth are coming down all over the world. Another important hurdle to overcome is the fact that many scientists labour under the impression that journal editors may not accept archived papers, claiming that this represents an unacceptable form of 'pre-publication'. These scientists worry that it will be difficult to assess the impact of their research if it isn't published in conventional journals. After all, they argue, promotions and awards are often determined by the impact factor of the journals in which one's work is published. Many are also unaware of the advantages of gaining greater visibility and are reluctant to make the effort to post their articles on archives. Just over a year ago, for example, the National Centre for Science Information (NCSI) at the Indian Institute of Science (IISc), the country's best-known higher education institution in science and technology, set up an institutional archive. The institute publishes about 1,800 papers a year, of which about 900 are indexed in the Web of Science, which gives access to the world's most prestigious, high impact research journals. Yet so far, the archive has attracted less than 70 papers. This experience emphasises an important point: it is not enough just to create an open-access archive. Filling it is far more important (and difficult). After all, an empty archive is worse than having no archive at all. But attitudes of the journals are changing, making institutional archiving a more attractive proposition. It is important for champions of open access to let scientists know that many journals, including high-impact titles such as Nature and the British Medical Journal, already permit authors to archive both preprints and postprints. The emphasis should therefore be on setting up open archives rather than on persuading journal publishers to make their journals open access. If scientists and scientific establishments in China, India and Brazil can be persuaded to adopt open access quickly, then it is likely that the rest of the developing world will follow. The author is a distinguished fellow at the M S Swaminathan Research Foundation, Chennai, India. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: spacer.gif Type: image/gif Size: 43 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/commons-law/attachments/20040909/1ccd8843/attachment.gif -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: spacer.gif Type: image/gif Size: 43 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/commons-law/attachments/20040909/1ccd8843/attachment-0001.gif -------------- next part -------------- _____ Shekhar Krishnan 9, Supriya, 2nd Floor Plot 709, Parsee Colony Road no.4 Dadar, Mumbai 400014 India http://www.crit.org.in/members/shekhar From rajlakshmi_nesargi at yahoo.com Thu Sep 9 11:52:18 2004 From: rajlakshmi_nesargi at yahoo.com (Rajlakshmi Nesargi) Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2004 23:22:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Commons-Law] SugarCRM.Inc with flexibile license options Message-ID: <20040909062218.18465.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> A piece of info SugarCRM sweetens new open-source CRM product Sugar Sales Professional 1.5 starts at $149 per seat News Story by Todd R. Weiss SEPTEMBER 08, 2004 (COMPUTERWORLD) - Open-source software start-up SugarCRM Inc. will release the first commercial enterprise version of its Linux-based open-source CRM application tomorrow, starting at $149 per seat for the first year. Sugar Sales Professional 1.5 is designed to provide business users with a flexible open-source application that also comes with technical support and training support. Sugar Sales Professional runs natively on Linux and can be used with Mac OS X and Microsoft Windows. John Roberts, co-founder and CEO of the company, said this approach reflects what customers have been asking for from software vendors. "Enterprise users want support, a knowledge base and a real company standing behind [a product], with updates, patches and fixes," Roberts said. "Yes, it is open-source, but a real company is there to support it." "[Customers] are tired of paying huge licensing costs for proprietary software applications," Roberts said. "We do not lock our customers into proprietary architecture." Roberts and his other business partners have 20 years of experience in the CRM marketplace. He helped start the Cupertino, Calif., company, which was founded in April, after leaving software vendor E.piphany Inc. in San Mateo, Calif., where he worked on commercial CRM applications. Because the software is open-source, enterprise customers are free to modify the code. The code is licensed under the Sugar Public License, which is a carbon copy of the Mozilla Public License. User changes to the code have to be released to the open-source community only if the code is redistributed to another party, including a partner vendor. Users can't sell the changed code under the license. In April, when SugarCRM released an early version of the application, there were just 48 downloads from users. Last month, there were 13,051 downloads, which Roberts said shows the need for such an application in the marketplace. The new Version 1.5 of Sugar Sales includes a Microsoft Outlook e-mail plug-in that allows Outlook users to capture customer e-mails into Sugar Sales with a single click. It also includes data importing tools that allow users to import data from most proprietary CRM products, including Salesforce.com, ACT, SalesLogix and Microsoft CRM. The application includes enterprise-specific tools and controls, including software optimization, administrator training, patch support and technical assistance, at a price lower than traditional CRM applications, which can cost as much as $1,000 per seat, Roberts said. After the $149 introductory price for the first year, Sugar Sales Professional subscribers will pay $239 per year for continued support and services. ===== "You must be the change you wish to see in the world. First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win"-Mahatma Gandhi __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From jace at pobox.com Thu Sep 9 13:03:25 2004 From: jace at pobox.com (Kiran Jonnalagadda) Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 13:03:25 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] SugarCRM.Inc with flexibile license options In-Reply-To: <20040909062218.18465.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040909062218.18465.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <891C4D24-0232-11D9-B375-000A95684A18@pobox.com> On Sep 9, 2004, at 11:52 AM, Rajlakshmi Nesargi wrote: > Open-source > software start-up SugarCRM Inc. will release the first > commercial enterprise version of its Linux-based > open-source CRM application tomorrow, starting at $149 > per seat for the first year. Something wrong here. Why does an open source product have per-seat licensing? If I have the code under an OSI-complaint license, I should be free to use as many copies as I wish. I smell a fish. Either it's not open source as they claim, or the per-seat licensing is just to rip off gullible customers, or each copy is dependent on a closed-source component. -- Kiran Jonnalagadda http://www.pobox.com/~jace From shekhar at crit.org.in Fri Sep 10 00:29:20 2004 From: shekhar at crit.org.in (Shekhar Krishnan) Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 00:29:20 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Property, IP, and Free Riding Message-ID: <5B644F4E-0292-11D9-9A5C-000A95A05D12@crit.org.in> Mark A. Lemley (Stanford University - School of Law) "Property, Intellectual Property, and Free Riding" Social Science Research Network Electronic Library http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=582602 Abstract: Courts and scholars have increasingly assumed that intellectual property is a form of property, and have applied the economic insights of Harold Demsetz and other property theorists to condemn the use of intellectual property by others as "free riding." In this article, I argue that this represents a fundamental misapplication of the economic theory of property. The economics of property is concerned with internalizing negative externalities - harms that one person's use of land does to another's interest to it, as in the familiar tragedy of the commons. But the externalities in intellectual property are positive, not negative, and property theory offers little or no justification for internalizing positive externalities. Indeed, doing so is at odds with the logic and functioning of the market. From this core insight, I proceed to explain why free riding is desirable in intellectual property cases except in limited circumstances where curbing it is necessary to encourage creativity. I explain why economic theory demonstrates that too much protection is just as bad as not enough protection, and therefore why intellectual property law must search for balance, not free riders. Finally, I consider whether we would be better served by another metaphor than the misused notion of intellectual property as a form of tangible property. _____ Shekhar Krishnan 9, Supriya, 2nd Floor Plot 709, Parsee Colony Road no.4 Dadar, Mumbai 400014 India http://crit.org.in/members/shekhar From paivakil at yahoo.co.in Fri Sep 10 00:38:34 2004 From: paivakil at yahoo.co.in (Mahesh T. Pai) Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 00:38:34 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] SugarCRM.Inc with flexibile license options In-Reply-To: <891C4D24-0232-11D9-B375-000A95684A18@pobox.com> References: <20040909062218.18465.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> <891C4D24-0232-11D9-B375-000A95684A18@pobox.com> Message-ID: <20040909190833.GA17770@nandini.home> Kiran Jonnalagadda said on Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 01:03:25PM +0530,: > Something wrong here. Why does an open source product have per-seat > licensing? Because the support is `per seat', and not for the software. Obviously, if you have more seats, your rupport requirements might be more. > If I have the code under an OSI-complaint license, I should be > free to use as many copies as I wish. Yes, you are. BUt, you will not get support, unless you pay me for the number of seats you use the s/w on. > Either it's not open source as they claim, or the per-seat licensing is > just to rip off gullible customers, or each copy is dependent on a > closed-source component. Probably, none of the above? -- Mahesh T. Pai <<>> http://paivakil.port5.com Distribute Free Software -- Help stamp out Software Hoarding! From sunil at mahiti.org Fri Sep 10 17:47:03 2004 From: sunil at mahiti.org (Sunil Abraham) Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 12:17:03 +0000 Subject: [Commons-Law] Microsoft patents tabbing through a web page Message-ID: <1094818622.771.10.camel@box> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/09/07/microsoft_patents_keyboard_navigation/ Microsoft patents tabbing through a web page By Andrew Orlowski Published Tuesday 7th September 2004 15:46 GMT Last week Microsoft was granted an ancient patent claim covering the navigation of web pages by keyboard. According to US Patent 6,785,865 (Discoverability and navigation of hyperlinks via tabs - Cote et al), the practice of tabbing through hyperlinks on a web page now belongs to Microsoft. The claim was filed more than seven years ago, in March 1997. "A user may press a tab key to discover and navigate to a first hyperlink that is part of a hypertext document. The first hyperlink is, in response, given focus and a focus shape is drawn around the text or graphics for the hot region of the hyperlink. If the user again presses the tab key, the next hyperlink is given focus and a focus shape (i.e., an outline that surrounds the next hyperlink) is drawn around the next hyperlink," we learn from the abstract. But the focus shape doesn't have to be a rectangle. Redmond's Brains Trust must have been burning the midnight oil back then at the height of the browsers wars, as the filing also claims ownership of circular (claim 7), polygonal (claim 8) focus shapes too. The filing lists twenty five references dating back to 1994. Last year Microsoft hired Marshall Phelps, the executive who founded IBM's billion dollar IP licensing program in the 1980s. Phelps told a legal conference last year that "You don't just get patents for the sake of getting patents," shortly before he joined Microsoft. Redmond launched its first ever IP licensing initiative last December, offering the rights to use the FAT file system to device manufacturers. Microsoft's right to hold the FAT patents is being re-examined by the US Patent and Trademarks Office, after a challange citing prior art by a public-interest organization. Ironically, in July an appeals court ruled that Microsoft had no right to hold patents on ergonomic keyboard design, which the company contests. ® Thanks, ಸುನೀಲ್ -- Sunil Abraham, sunil at mahiti.org http://www.mahiti.org 314/1, 7th Cross, Domlur Bangalore - 560 071 Karnataka, INDIA Ph/Fax: +91 80 51150580. Mobile: +91 80 36701931 Currently on sabbatical with APDIP/UNDP Manager - International Open Source Network Wisma UN, Block C Komplex Pejabat Damansara. Jalan Dungun, Damansara Heights. 50490 Kuala Lumpur. P. O. Box 12544, 50782, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: (60) 3-2091-5167, Fax: (60) 3-2095-2087 sunil at apdip.net http://www.iosn.net http://www.apdip.net From jace at pobox.com Fri Sep 10 15:51:11 2004 From: jace at pobox.com (Kiran Jonnalagadda) Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:51:11 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] SugarCRM.Inc with flexibile license options In-Reply-To: <20040909190833.GA17770@nandini.home> References: <20040909062218.18465.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> <891C4D24-0232-11D9-B375-000A95684A18@pobox.com> <20040909190833.GA17770@nandini.home> Message-ID: <2337E3A1-0313-11D9-B375-000A95684A18@pobox.com> On Sep 10, 2004, at 12:38 AM, Mahesh T. Pai wrote: > Because the support is `per seat', and not for the > software. Obviously, if you have more seats, your rupport requirements > might be more. > > Yes, you are. BUt, you will not get support, unless you pay me for > the number of seats you use the s/w on. So in the end, it's just lip service to open source, right? It's like, "you pay us if you want help with using this software, but we won't pay you if you fix any of our bugs." While this is a step forward, I'm not sure if this is a very significant step. -- Kiran Jonnalagadda http://www.pobox.com/~jace From paivakil at yahoo.co.in Fri Sep 10 18:54:31 2004 From: paivakil at yahoo.co.in (Mahesh T. Pai) Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 18:54:31 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] SugarCRM.Inc with flexibile license options In-Reply-To: <2337E3A1-0313-11D9-B375-000A95684A18@pobox.com> References: <20040909062218.18465.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> <891C4D24-0232-11D9-B375-000A95684A18@pobox.com> <20040909190833.GA17770@nandini.home> <2337E3A1-0313-11D9-B375-000A95684A18@pobox.com> Message-ID: <20040910132431.GB3610@nandini.home> Kiran Jonnalagadda said on Fri, Sep 10, 2004 at 03:51:11PM +0530,: > So in the end, it's just lip service to open source, right? It's like, > "you pay us if you want help with using this software, but we won't pay > you if you fix any of our bugs." > > While this is a step forward, I'm not sure if this is a very > significant step. You really have a wrong idea of Free Software. It is free, because you are free of burdens; not because you get it free of cost. -- Mahesh T. Pai <<>> http://paivakil.port5.com Copying an idea is plagiarism. Copying many ideas from many authors is RESEARCH. From jace at pobox.com Fri Sep 10 20:40:21 2004 From: jace at pobox.com (Kiran Jonnalagadda) Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 20:40:21 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] SugarCRM.Inc with flexibile license options In-Reply-To: <20040910132431.GB3610@nandini.home> References: <20040909062218.18465.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> <891C4D24-0232-11D9-B375-000A95684A18@pobox.com> <20040909190833.GA17770@nandini.home> <2337E3A1-0313-11D9-B375-000A95684A18@pobox.com> <20040910132431.GB3610@nandini.home> Message-ID: <88A8976D-033B-11D9-B375-000A95684A18@pobox.com> On Sep 10, 2004, at 6:54 PM, Mahesh T. Pai wrote: > You really have a wrong idea of Free Software. It is free, because you > are free of burdens; not because you get it free of cost. You can give an illiterate man a book on grammar and issue a press release congratulating yourself, but that doesn't change the fact that he can't read it. What burden has it freed him from? When Netscape when open source with their browser, they didn't get the response they expected, because external programmers couldn't understand the code. It was so much of a problem, they threw away their code and started from scratch, in effect negating the open source nature of the code. Mozilla the organisation is different from Mozilla the browser source code. It was the *organisation* that leveraged the open source development model to make the browser a success. Note: open source development model, not just source code. Nothing in the press release tells me how SugarCRM is planning to make open source work to the benefit of their customers. They're making it appear like magic pixie dust; add "open source" to the press release, get the good press, and attract customers who come thinking that if it's open source, it must be as good as the other well known open source success stories. -- Kiran Jonnalagadda http://www.pobox.com/~jace From jace at pobox.com Fri Sep 10 21:22:52 2004 From: jace at pobox.com (Kiran Jonnalagadda) Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 21:22:52 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] The Politics of Magic Pixie Dust Message-ID: <7973ED43-0341-11D9-B375-000A95684A18@pobox.com> http://terminal.n17.waw.pl/stable/pliki/tarkowski_aoir_paper.pdf While we are on the subject of SugarCRM, here is an interesting paper that examines the "Socio-technical Effects of Open-Sourcing Netscape Communicator Code." -- Kiran Jonnalagadda http://www.pobox.com/~jace From paivakil at yahoo.co.in Fri Sep 10 23:13:12 2004 From: paivakil at yahoo.co.in (Mahesh T. Pai) Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 23:13:12 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] SugarCRM.Inc with flexibile license options In-Reply-To: <88A8976D-033B-11D9-B375-000A95684A18@pobox.com> References: <20040909062218.18465.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> <891C4D24-0232-11D9-B375-000A95684A18@pobox.com> <20040909190833.GA17770@nandini.home> <2337E3A1-0313-11D9-B375-000A95684A18@pobox.com> <20040910132431.GB3610@nandini.home> <88A8976D-033B-11D9-B375-000A95684A18@pobox.com> Message-ID: <20040910174312.GB9761@nandini.home> Kiran Jonnalagadda said on Fri, Sep 10, 2004 at 08:40:21PM +0530,: > When Netscape when open source with their browser, they didn't get > the response they expected, because external programmers couldn't > understand the code. It was so much of a problem, they threw away > their code and started from scratch, in effect negating the open > source nature of the code. There is much more to the Free Software movement that mere access to code. Have a look at http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#TOCOpen While at it, have a look at the other files in the /philosophy/ directory. HTH. -- Mahesh T. Pai <<>> http://paivakil.port5.com Learn from the mistakes of others. You won't live long enough to make all of them yourself. From paivakil at yahoo.co.in Fri Sep 10 23:18:02 2004 From: paivakil at yahoo.co.in (Mahesh T. Pai) Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 23:18:02 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] SugarCRM.Inc with flexibile license options In-Reply-To: <20040910174312.GB9761@nandini.home> References: <20040909062218.18465.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> <891C4D24-0232-11D9-B375-000A95684A18@pobox.com> <20040909190833.GA17770@nandini.home> <2337E3A1-0313-11D9-B375-000A95684A18@pobox.com> <20040910132431.GB3610@nandini.home> <88A8976D-033B-11D9-B375-000A95684A18@pobox.com> <20040910174312.GB9761@nandini.home> Message-ID: <20040910174802.GA10199@nandini.home> Mahesh T. Pai said on Fri, Sep 10, 2004 at 11:13:12PM +0530,: > While at it, have a look at the other files in the /philosophy/ > directory. and in partlcular, at http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html If I have not bored you enough, http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/drdobbs-letter.html too. -- Mahesh T. Pai <<>> http://paivakil.port5.com From prashant at wannabelawyer.com Sat Sep 11 11:21:44 2004 From: prashant at wannabelawyer.com (Prashant Iyengar) Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2004 11:21:44 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Police gun for star after piracy stunt Message-ID: <200409111120.57949.root <>> Hi, Found this in the morning paper. Incidentally, has anyone here tried TOI's epaper? Pretty neat, except that they plan to charge for it. Regards, Prashant Police gun for star after piracy stunt TIMES NEWS NETWORK Hyderabad: Filmstar Mahesh Babu and director Gunashekar are wanted by the police for their involvement in a kidnap case, criminal trespass and causing mischief in Warangal town. The duo, however, got a temporary reprieve as the High Court on Friday asked the police not to arrest them till Monday. Justice Ch Surya Rao gave the order on their application for anticipatory bail. The Warangal police had sought the help of the Hyderabad city police to trace and arrest the filmstar. Director Gunashekar was also allegedly involved in the incident in Warangal. “The case is serious as Mahesh Babu has kidnapped a person from one of the video libraries which he and his fans raided,” Warangal SP K Srinivasa Reddy told The Times of India from Warangal During a victory procession of his film Arjun in Warangal town on Thursday afternoon, Mahesh Babu and some of his fans allegedly barged into two video libraries, ransacked them and beat up the owners. The video libraries were allegedly circulating pirated CDs. Warangal police stood mute witness as the actor and director went about their business in true filmi style. “Mahesh Babu went about doing what he did despite the police asking him to lodge a complaint against the video libary owners if they were selling pirated CDs,” Srinivasa Reddy said. He said the police had a videotape of the entire episode of Mahesh Babu and his fans resorting to the violence. According to the police, towards the fag end of the victory procession taken out for the film Arjun, Mahesh Babu and 20-25 of his fans raided two video libraries at Matwada in Warangal town. Cases under IPC section 448 (criminal trespass), section 427 (mischief) and section 366 (kidnap) were registered against the culprits. Mahesh Babu is the prime accused in the case. Attempts by The Times of India to speak to Mahesh Babu and director Gunashekar proved futile as both of them were not answering their mobile phones. From ritika at sarai.net Sat Sep 11 16:42:17 2004 From: ritika at sarai.net (Ritika) Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2004 16:42:17 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Publishing confusions - ADVISE please Message-ID: <4142DD91.9070004@sarai.net> Dear All, Writing this mail for advise from list members. I have been maintaining a blog on my ongoing research on Slaugther Houses in Delhi. This blog is an attempt to build community of commentators around what i am excavating and thinking. (Read posting titled: HYGEINE, LANGUAGE AND APPRENTICESHIP) On reading some discussion papers of a workshop on Education, by Konrad Adenaur Foundation (6th - 9th, April 2003) i liked what was presented by Ms. Rumman Hameed, and quoted excerpts from her workshop presentation text in my blog. She has written to me that, that her article from the same presentation will be appearing in a publication by Sage. She has asked me to withdraw the quote or else to seek permission from the publishers or Adenaur Foundation. The Adenaur Foundation's workshop proceedings (photocopied - spiral bound) has no text on it forbidding any quoting or for that matter any further circulation. Author's text also does not carry any `do not quote` sticker. I need to reply to Rumman as she is also a young scholar putting her tentative feet into the world of academic paper publishing. But, i really like what she has stated in her paper and would like all my blog readers to engage with these observations. Now, what am i supposed to make of all this? Do as researchers, we have to wait for publishing houses to give permissions for comparing, appreciating, critiquing, our peers' work? I am a little baffled and distressed by all this, and need all of yours collective insights into this. yours in anticipation Ritika -- Ritika Shrimali The Sarai Programme http://blog.sarai.net/users/ritika From ritika at sarai.net Sat Sep 11 18:00:30 2004 From: ritika at sarai.net (Ritika) Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2004 18:00:30 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Publishing confusions - ADVISE please In-Reply-To: <20040911114835.28353.h54.wm@smtp.sc0.cp.net> References: <20040911114835.28353.h54.wm@smtp.sc0.cp.net> Message-ID: <4142EFE6.9000307@sarai.net> Thanx jayani, i am forwarding your mail on the commons law list for a wider discussion cheers ritika jaynakothari at justice.com wrote: > Dear Ritika, > > I read your blog where you have quoted from Rumman's > work. As far the practice goes, you can still use > Rumman's work even after it is published by Sage, by > citing the new published verison of the article and > thus giving acknowledgement to the author in your blog. > Copyright law does not prevent use of any author's > work for research and critique (which would classify as > 'fair use') provided proper acknowledgement is given to > the author and the copyright owner (i.e. Sage > Publishers). You don't need the Publisher's permission > for just quoting it on your blog, provided you have > cited the piece correctly. > > best, > Jayna > > > > On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 16:42:17 +0530, Ritika wrote: > > >>Dear All, >> >>Writing this mail for advise from list members. >> >>I have been maintaining a blog on my ongoing research >>on Slaugther >>Houses in Delhi. This blog is an attempt to build >>community of >>commentators around what i am excavating and thinking. >> >> >>(Read posting titled: HYGEINE, LANGUAGE AND >>APPRENTICESHIP) >> >>On reading some discussion papers of a workshop on >>Education, by Konrad >>Adenaur Foundation (6th - 9th, April 2003) i liked > > what > >>was presented by >> Ms. Rumman Hameed, and quoted excerpts from her >>workshop presentation >>text in my blog. >> >>She has written to me that, that her article from the >>same presentation >>will be appearing in a publication by Sage. She has >>asked me to withdraw >>the quote or else to seek permission from the >>publishers or Adenaur >>Foundation. >> >>The Adenaur Foundation's workshop proceedings >>(photocopied - spiral >>bound) has no text on it forbidding any quoting or for >>that matter any >>further circulation. Author's text also does not carry >>any `do not >>quote` sticker. >> >>I need to reply to Rumman as she is also a young >>scholar putting her >>tentative feet into the world of academic paper >>publishing. But, i >>really like what she has stated in her paper and would >>like all my blog >>readers to engage with these observations. >> >>Now, what am i supposed to make of all this? Do as >>researchers, we have >>to wait for publishing houses to give permissions for >>comparing, >>appreciating, critiquing, our peers' work? >> >>I am a little baffled and distressed by all this, and >>need all of yours >>collective insights into this. >> >>yours in anticipation >> >>Ritika >> >> >> >>-- >>Ritika Shrimali >>The Sarai Programme >> >>http://blog.sarai.net/users/ritika >>_______________________________________________ >>commons-law mailing list >>commons-law at sarai.net >>https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/commons-law > > > Ashira Law > Advocates and Legal Consultants > 50/6 Palace Road > Bangalore 56 00 52 > Ph: 0091-80-2261090 > _________________________________________________ > FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community > http://www.FindLaw.com > Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email! > http://mail.Justice.com -- Ritika Shrimali The Sarai Programme http://blog.sarai.net/users/ritika From shamnadbasheer at yahoo.co.in Sun Sep 12 19:02:42 2004 From: shamnadbasheer at yahoo.co.in (=?iso-8859-1?q?Shamnad=20Basheer?=) Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 14:32:42 +0100 (BST) Subject: [Commons-Law] Publishing confusions - ADVISE please In-Reply-To: <4142EFE6.9000307@sarai.net> Message-ID: <20040912133242.55634.qmail@web8410.mail.in.yahoo.com> Dear Ritika, While I agree with Jayna, I would caution that if possible, you intersperse the quotes with some comments as well-just so that you better your chances of remaining in the 'fair dealing' category. A fair use analysis would, to a large extent, depend on both the quality and quantity (more so the quality..) of the quoted material, in comparison with the original work. If for example, you had quoted about 90% of Rummans work, you could well run into problems-it may be difficult to qualify a taking of 90% of an authors work as 'fair dealing'-despite the fact that this taking is for the purpose of critique.. Then again, the law would also look at the nature of your use of her work. If you have only quoted from her work, without additions/comments of your own, you could run the risk of falling outside the 'fair dealing' category. On a side note, the fact that the workshop proceedings do not have a copyright notice or a statement that you cannot quote is not prejudicial to their claim against you (should one exist in the first place). Copyright exists by virtue of creation of the work and a notice is immaterial to a claim against copying (though it may certainly push the case a little more in favour of the copyright owner). The above holds true for credits as well. Giving credit to a borrowed piece of work may not absolve you of copyright liability-if your borrowing exceeds the scope of the 'fair dealing' defence (though of course, it may help your case a little more..) I hope this helps. Shamnad . --- Ritika wrote: > Thanx jayani, i am forwarding your mail on the > commons law list for a > wider discussion > > cheers > ritika > > jaynakothari at justice.com wrote: > > Dear Ritika, > > > > I read your blog where you have quoted from > Rumman's > > work. As far the practice goes, you can still use > > Rumman's work even after it is published by Sage, > by > > citing the new published verison of the article > and > > thus giving acknowledgement to the author in your > blog. > > Copyright law does not prevent use of any > author's > > work for research and critique (which would > classify as > > 'fair use') provided proper acknowledgement is > given to > > the author and the copyright owner (i.e. Sage > > Publishers). You don't need the Publisher's > permission > > for just quoting it on your blog, provided you > have > > cited the piece correctly. > > > > best, > > Jayna > > > > > > > > On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 16:42:17 +0530, Ritika wrote: > > > > > >>Dear All, > >> > >>Writing this mail for advise from list members. > >> > >>I have been maintaining a blog on my ongoing > research > >>on Slaugther > >>Houses in Delhi. This blog is an attempt to build > >>community of > >>commentators around what i am excavating and > thinking. > >> > >> > >>(Read posting titled: HYGEINE, LANGUAGE AND > >>APPRENTICESHIP) > >> > >>On reading some discussion papers of a workshop on > >>Education, by Konrad > >>Adenaur Foundation (6th - 9th, April 2003) i liked > > > > what > > > >>was presented by > >> Ms. Rumman Hameed, and quoted excerpts from her > >>workshop presentation > >>text in my blog. > >> > >>She has written to me that, that her article from > the > >>same presentation > >>will be appearing in a publication by Sage. She > has > >>asked me to withdraw > >>the quote or else to seek permission from the > >>publishers or Adenaur > >>Foundation. > >> > >>The Adenaur Foundation's workshop proceedings > >>(photocopied - spiral > >>bound) has no text on it forbidding any quoting or > for > >>that matter any > >>further circulation. Author's text also does not > carry > >>any `do not > >>quote` sticker. > >> > >>I need to reply to Rumman as she is also a young > >>scholar putting her > >>tentative feet into the world of academic paper > >>publishing. But, i > >>really like what she has stated in her paper and > would > >>like all my blog > >>readers to engage with these observations. > >> > >>Now, what am i supposed to make of all this? Do as > >>researchers, we have > >>to wait for publishing houses to give permissions > for > >>comparing, > >>appreciating, critiquing, our peers' work? > >> > >>I am a little baffled and distressed by all this, > and > >>need all of yours > >>collective insights into this. > >> > >>yours in anticipation > >> > >>Ritika > >> > >> > >> > >>-- > >>Ritika Shrimali > >>The Sarai Programme > >> > >>http://blog.sarai.net/users/ritika > >>_______________________________________________ > >>commons-law mailing list > >>commons-law at sarai.net > >>https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/commons-law > > > > > > Ashira Law > > Advocates and Legal Consultants > > 50/6 Palace Road > > Bangalore 56 00 52 > > Ph: 0091-80-2261090 > > _________________________________________________ > > FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community > > http://www.FindLaw.com > > Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email! > > http://mail.Justice.com > > > -- > Ritika Shrimali > The Sarai Programme > > http://blog.sarai.net/users/ritika > _______________________________________________ > commons-law mailing list > commons-law at sarai.net > https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/commons-law > ________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your life partner online Go to: http://yahoo.shaadi.com/india-matrimony From lawrence at altlawforum.org Sun Sep 12 22:59:08 2004 From: lawrence at altlawforum.org (Lawrence Liang) Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 22:59:08 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Publishing confusions - ADVISE please In-Reply-To: <20040912133242.55634.qmail@web8410.mail.in.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Hi Ritika Just to add to some of what Shamnad has already said about the importance of inserting comments etc or showing the usage to be a part of a larger process of research, criticism or review. Sec. 52 (1)(a) of the copyright Act allows for fair dealing, and I am reproducing it below. There is not much case law on the point in India, but one useful case would be Civic Chandran v. Amiini Amma, I am including a case note of the same as well as the case below. Your use of it won web blog may take it outside of the scope of private use, including research, so you will have to ensure that it comes under 'criticism or review', and that's where the insertion of comments etc will help. Lawrence =================== Sec. 52 (1) (a) a fair dealing with a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work 3[not being a computer programme] for the purposes of- 4[(i) private use, including research;]  (ii) criticism or review, whether of that work or of any other work; Case Note: ŒNingal Enne Communistakki¹ is a well known drama written in 1952 by the late Thoppil Bhasi a famous Malayalam Playwright. All the rights in publishing and staging of the drama were reserved by Thoppil Bhasi and after his death, stand vested with the respondents. Civic Chandran, the defendant, has written another counter drama 'Ningal, Are Communistakki', and had published the same and intends to stage the drama widely. The defendant had filed a suit for copyright infringement and secured an interim injuction against the appellants. This appeal was filed against that order.   This court addressed two grounds for appeal: first, whether there was copyright infringement? The court found that there was similarity between the ideas and themes in the two plays but there was no slavish copying. Moreover, the appellants claimed that the counter-drama was protected under s 52(1) (b) which related to fair dealing for the purposes of criticism. The court found that there was ample evidence that the counter drama was written to contest the ideologies of the drama and did not reproduce portions of it to develop a competing script.   Secondly, the court considered the grounds for an interim order and relied on the ratio of the American Cyanamid case. Balancing the interests and claims of the two parties the court found that the balance tilted in favour of the plaintiff given the expenses they had incurred and dismissed the application for an interim injunction.   Citation: 1996 PTR 142 (Kerala High Court) Full Text of the decision Civic Chandran v. Ammini Amma Hon'ble Mr. T. V. Ramakrishnan, J. NLS 1996 CR/Kerl. C. M. A. No. 329 of 1995, Decided on 27.2.1996 JUDGMENT T. V. RAMAKRISHNAN, J. The staging of drama 'Ningal Are Communistakki' (hereinafter referred to as 'the counter drama') written by the appellant No. 1 Mr. Civic Chandran has been restrained by an interlocutory order of injunction issued by the learned Additional District Judge-1, Mavelikara in O. S. 1/1995 pending before him. The ground on which the order has been issued is that the staging of the said drama would prima facie constitute infringement of the copy right of the famous drama 'Ningal Enna Communistakki' (hereinafter referred to as 'drama') written by late Mr. Thoppil Bhasi, one of the well known playwrights whose legal representatives are the plaintiffs in the suit and the respondents in the appeal. Aggrieved by the order, defendants 1, 4 and 5 have filed this appeal. The question to be considered is whether the order under challenge is legally sustainable in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the light of the legal principles required to be followed while granting interlocutory order of injunction in cases like the one on hand. 2. Briefly stated, tire relevant facts are thus:'Ningal Enne Communistakki' is a well known drama written in 1952 by the late Thoppil Bhasi one of the famous Malayalam Playwright who has received some prestigious awards for his literary skill as a playwright . According to plaintiffs, the said drama dealt with some of the burning social and political problems of those days specially espoused by the Communist Party of India before its split. The drama had considerably aided the undivided Communist Party of India to come to power in Kerala in 1957 Assembly Elections. The realistic theme and songs of the said drama attracted and influenced large audience enormously. Some of the characters of the dramas like 'Mala' and 'Karumpan' had become immortal. The drama had already been played in more than 10,000 stages and was widely appreciated throughout the State and outside and is still capable of attracting large audience. It was being staged by the 6th defendant K.P.A.C. (Kerala People's Art Club), a famous Arts Club on the basis of the permission originally given by Thoppil Bhasi and subsequently by the respondents. All the rights in publishing and staging of the drama were reserved by Thoppil Bhasi and after his death, stand vested with the plaintiffs. According to plaintiffs, the 1st defendant has 'fabricated' another drama 'Ningal, Are Communistakki', styling it as a counter drama to Thoppil Bhasi and had published the same in 1995 in the annual issue of 'India Today (Malayalam) which is owned by the 2nd dependent, a private company whose executive Director, Printer and Publisher is the 3rd defendant. The 1st defendant had copied substantial portions of the drama with some comments here and there in his counter dramas. The characters and dialogues in the drama are also reproduced as such in the counter drama. Such copying and reproduction are made without any bonafides and with intention of taking undue advantage pit that creative talent and labour of Thoppil Bhasi which is illegal and violative of the provisions of the Copy Right Act. Further it was alleged that through the so called counter drama, an attempt has been made by the 1st defendant to denegrade and defame Mr. Thoppil Bhasi. Defendants 4 and 5, the President and Secretary of a drama troop by name 'Rangabhasha' are making large scale preparations to stage the counter drama at various centres. In the circumstances, the plaintiffs have prayed for a perpetual injunction against defendants 1 to 3 restraining them from publishing the counter drama any more and a perpetual injunction against defendant 1, 4 and 5 restraining them from staging the counter drama. Plaintiffs have also prayed for damages from defendants I to 3 for publishing the counter drama in the literary annual edition of 'India Today' which is owned by the 2nd defendant, a Private Limited Company whose Executive Director, Printer and Publisher is the 3rd defendant. 3. Appellant No. 1 as 1st defendant in the suit (1st counter petitioner in I.A.394/95) has filed a detailed counter affidavit opposing the reliefs prayed for in the application. While admitting the fact of writing and publishing the counter drama it was pointed out that though the counter drama was published in the annual issue of 'India Today' in January, 1995. the plaintiffs have filed the suit only in the month of August, 1995 just prior to the date fixed for the maiden staging of the counter drama. There was no complaint about any violation of the copy right till the filing of the suit. As such, it was contended that there is no bona fides in the claim made in the suit and the application. It was also claimed that the counter drama is a new literary innovation 'where a play is counter-posed by using the very same these and characters'. Late Thoppil Bhasi himself has adopted this method of writing dramas in his later play 'Innu Innale Nale'. That play is a criticism against Bhasi himself and he refused to confront his own characters in 'Ningal Enne Communistakki'. The counter drama has been written mainly for the purpose of criticism or critical analysis of the original drama and its characters for bringing out before the public how it failed to achieve the ultimate purpose intended to the achieved by Bhasi by writing it. Copying of certain portions of the drama in the counter drama can only be treated as 'fair dealing' since the purpose of reproduction was criticism of the drama. As such it will amount to fair dealing and will not amount to infringement of copy right. The counter drama is an original creative work of the 1st defendant on which he has expended considerable time, energy, labour and literary skill. The passages copied from the drama was extracted only for the purpose of reciting or reading the same from the stage as a dramatic device and such uses cannot also be treated as an infringement of the copy right. It was also pointed out that appellants have already spent considerable amount of time, effort and money in training the actors by conducting the rehearsal camps and making costumes and stage settings. As a result of the public debate and advertisement carried out by appellants throughout the State, the public was eager to view the drama. If the counter drama is staged, it will have a great impact on the developments in the State just as the drama was having when it was staged originally. If the staging of the counter drama is delayed, the time, effort and money spent already would go waste since the theme of the counter drama is closely related to contemporary political situation, the relevance of it itself will be lost considerably, if not fully. If the injunction is to continue, it will cause irreparable injury to the appellants - counter petitioners. On the other hand, even if the counter drama is permitted to be staged, no serious or irreparable injury or prejudice will be caused to the plaintiffs. Even if loss or injury is caused to the plaintiffs as a result of the staging of the play, the same can be compensated by awarding damages if the court ultimately finds that there is any infringement of the copy right claimed by the plaintiffs in respect of the drama. The claim was resisted on the above basis. 4. After referring to the relevant provisions of the Copy Right Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') namely Sections 14, 51 and 52 and certain judicial decisions on the point, the learned Judge considered the question whether the 1st defendant had copied or reproduced substantial portion of the drama in their counter drama and whether such copying can be treated as 'fair dealing'. On the 1st question, the learned Judge found that the 1st defendant had extracted substantial portion of the drama. After finding so, on the question of defence plea of 'fair dealing', the only discussion paragraph 13 of the order is to this effect: 'Mr. Civic Chandran, the 1st defendant ? counter petitioner may have some particular ideas, political or social. He has every right to express and propagate those ideas. Writing, publishing or playing of drams is an effective media for expressing or propagating such ideas. In doing so, he may criticise the views expressed by others. But he must seek to write, publish or play drama in such a way as not to infringe the copyright of the work of others. If he wanted to criticise the ideas expressed by Thoppil Bhasi in his drama, Mr. Civic Chandran could have used his own characters, dialogues and manner of presentation in the counter drama. Even if he had extracted portions of the drama for the purpose of such criticism it would not have infringed the copy right provided that he could show that is only 'fair dealing'. Copying down or extracting substantial portions of the drama, and using the same characters and dialogues of the drama with some comments here and there through two or three characters in the counter-drama cannot be treated as 'fair dealing' for the purpose of criticism. But that is what exactly is done by Mr. Civic Chandran. In such a case, he cannot claim protection under Section 52 of the Copy Right Act.' 5. Both sides have reiterated before me their respective contentions raised before the court below while arguing the appeal. Further, Shri A. X. Varghese, the learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that while granting temporary injunction, the learned Judge has not even adverted to the important aspects of irreparable injury and the balance of convenience and as such the order is unsustainable in law. It was also pointed out that there is a fair chance of the defence, plea of 'fair dealing' being accepted and as such no injunction should have been ordered taking note of the irreparable loss and injury likely to be caused to the appellants by the grant of temporary injunction. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents Shri Achutha Kurup had submitted that being an appeal against an interim order passed in a pending suit unless it is found, that the order is totally illegal or perverse, this court while exercising the appellate jurisdiction will not normally disturb the discretion exercised by the lower court while passing the impugned order reitraining the staging of the counter drama. The balance of convenience is in keeping the status quo which has continued from 22.8.1995 till the disposal of the suit by the trial court. As such, there may be a direction to the trial court to dispose of the suit as early as possible keeping alive the order of injunction till the date of disposal of the suit was the submission of the learned counsel for the respondent. 6. As already indicated is a case where the plaintiffs have alleged infringement of their copyright in the drama by copying or adopting substantial portions of the drama as part of the counter drama. The submission was that it amounted to literary piracy or plagiarism. The fact that portions of the drama have been copied or extracted in the counter drama is not in serious dispute. There is also no case that such copying was done with the consent of the owners of the copyright. But, it is relevant to note that the drama has not been reproduced or copied in its entirely or even substantially in the counter drama. There is also no specific case that the purpose of copying is to imitate or to produce a drama similar to that of the drama with inconsequential changes here and there to mask the copying, for the purpose of conveying the same idea for rival purpose. As against the alleged infringement of the copyright, the main defence put forward is one of 'fair dealing' as contemplated under Section 52(1) (a)(ii) of the Copy Right Act. The specific case put forward in substantiation of the defence set up is that copying or extracting of portions of the drama has been done only as part of the literary technique or method of writing a counter drama. It has been done specifically for the purpose of criticism of the drama, the ideals and the events dealt with therein. The scheme of the criticism to reproduce such parts of the drama which is to be criticized for the effectiveness of the criticism and not for the purpose of re-enacting the drama for a rival purpose or to cause prejudice monetary or otherwise to the author for the persons in whom the copyright is vested. Such copying or adoption will not amount to unfair appropriation of the drama was the submission on behalf of the 1st defendant. It was contented that the same is the case in regard to the alleged adoption of portions of the dialogues and the names of some of the characters in the drama as part of the counter drama. It was submitted that in the light of the claim made and the defence set up, the plaintiffs can be found to have established a prima facie case of infringement of the copy right only in case it is found that the defendants have failed to substantiate prima facie their statutory defence of 'fair dealing'. This is brief is the scope and the effect of the pleadings and the arguments of the parties. 7. From what is discussed above, it is clearly a case where while the plaintiffs have got a copyright in the drama and they have put forward a claim based on its alleged infringement by the 1st defendant by copying substantial portions of the drama, the defendants have put up a statutory defence of 'fair dealing' in answer to the plaint claim. In the circumstances, it becomes necessary to consider what are the guiding principles to be followed and the, approach to be made in the matter of granting or refusing the interim injunction prayed for in this case. 8. The law regarding copyright and its infringement in India is at present contained in the provisions of the Act and the decisions rendered prior to and subsequent to the Act by the Indian Courts and the Foreign Courts to the extent they do not go against the statutory provisions. While Section 51 of the Act deals with actions which may amount to infringement of the copyright. Section 52 deals with the acts which may not constitute an infringement of copyright. Section 52(1) (a) of the Act reads thus: '52. Certain acts not to be infringement of copyright:(1) The following acts shall not constitute an infringement of copyright, namely: (a) A fair dealing with a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work not being a computer programme for the purpose of - (i) Private use, including research: (ii) Criticsm or review whether of that work or of any other work.' The term 'fair dealing' has not been defined as such in the Act, But Section 52(1) (a) and (b) specifically refers to 'fair dealing ' of the work and not to reproduction of the work. Accordingly, it may be reasonable to hold that the re-production of the whole work or a substantial portion of it as such will not normally be permitted and only extracts or quotations from the work will alone be permitted even as 'fair dealing'. In the circumstances, the quantum of extracts or quotations permissible will depend upon the circumstances of each case. It may not be proper to lay down any hard and fast rules to coverall cases where infringement of copy right is alleged on the basis of extracts or quotations from the copyrighted work. In a case like the one on hand, court will have to take into inconsideration (1) the quantum and value of the matter taken in relation to the comments or criticism; (2) the purpose for which it is taken; and (3) the likelihood of competition between the two works. 9. According to Copinger, the learned author, ' It is only when the court has determined that a substantial part has been taken that any question of fair dealing arises. Though, once this question arises, the degree of substantiality, that is to say, the quantity and value of the matter taken, is an important factor in considering whether or not there has been a 'fair dealing'. Further, it is thought that, even under the present law, in considering whether a dealing with a particular work was fair, it would have to be considered whether any competition was likely to exist between the two works. But each case will depend on its facts, and what may he fair in one case will not necessarily be fair in other case.' (See Copinger and Skone James in Copyright, Eleventh Edn., Paragraph 461. page 196). 10. As regards the principles governing grant or refusal of injunction in Copy right cases, the following passage from Halsbury's Laws of England, 4th Edn., Vo1.9, Paragraph 944, is apposite and may be usefully quoted. 'An interlocutory injunction will not, however, be granted where the defendant might suffer irreparable injury from an injunction restraining him from publishing pending the trial and the plaintiff can be properly protected by the defendant being ordered to keep an account, nor will it normally be granted where a bona fide defence of fair dealing has been pleaded coming to the Court or his conduct has amounted to acquiescence in the infringement or if there is any substantial doubt as to the plaintiff's right to succeed. It has been held that in considering whether to grant an interlocutory injunction the Judge must look at the whole case and that the remedy by interlocutory injunction must be made the subject of strict rules.' 11. The balancing process indicated by Lord Diplock in American Cyanamid v. Ethicon (1975) RPC 513 at pages 539-542) is relevant: 'The object of interlocutory injunction is to protect the plaintiff against injury by violation of his right for which he could not be adequately compensated in damages recoverable in the action if the uncertainty were resolved in his favour at the trial; but the plaintiffs' need for such protection must weighed against the corresponding need of the defendant to be protected against injury resulting from his having been prevented from exercising his own legal rights for which he could not be adequately compensated under the plaintiffs favour at the trial. The court must weigh one need against another and determine where the balance of convenience' lies.' 12. Alongwith the above special legal principle applicable to copy right cases, the normal factors to be established before granting or not granting interim injunction have also to be kept in view, namely the establishment of a prima facie case, the balance of convenience and the irreparable injury liable to be caused in case injunction is refused. At the same time, it has also to be borne in mind that it is no part of the court's function at the interlocutory stage of the litigation to try to resolve finally any of the points to be decided in the suit with reference to the evidence yet to be adduced in the suit during trial. 13. Hubbard v. Vosper (1972 (2) W.L.R.389) rightly relied upon by the learned District Judge was a case where a claim based on infringement of copy right was put forward on the allegation that copious questions were made by the defendant in his book from the copy righted work. As in this case, the defence in that case was also one of fair dealing'. Of the three judges of the Court of Appeal who heard the case, Lord Denning M.L.J. has dealt with in detail the principle to be borne in mind while issuing interim injunction with specific reference to the defence of 'fair dealing'. It was also a case where the trial Judge had initially granted exparte interim injunction which was later confirmed by him after hearing the defendant. On appeal, the Court of Appeal had vacated the order in injunction and permitted the defendant to proceed with the publication of his work without any condition whatsoever. It was held in the decision that 'fair dealing' is a question of fact and of impression to which factors that are relevant include the extent of quotation and its proportion to comment (which may be justifiable although the quotation of the whole work). It is relevant to quote the following passage from Vosper's Case (page 398, Denning L.J.): 'It is impossible to define what is 'fair dealing'. It must be a question of degree. You must consider first the number and extent of the quotations and extracts. Are they altogether too many and too long to be fair? Then you must consider the use made of them. If they are used as a basis for comment, criticism or review, that may be fair dealing. If they are used to convey the same information as the author, for a rival purpose, that may be unfair. Next you must consider the proportions. To take long extracts and attach short comments may be unfair. But, short extracts and long comments may be fair. Other considerations may come. to mind also. But after all is said and done; it must be a matter of impression. As with fair comment in the law of lible so with fair dealing in the law of copyright. The tribunal of fact must decide.' In the same decision, it has been held that criticism or review may relate not only to literary style but also to be doctrine or philosophy of the author as expounded in his book. A fair criticism of the ideas and events described in the books or documents would constitute 'fair dealing'. It is also relevant to quote the following observations of Lord Denning M.R. in Hubbard v. Vosper (1972(2) W.L.R. 389): In considering whether to grant an interlocutory injunction the right course for a judge is to look at the whole case. He must have recalled not only the strength of the claim but also to the strength of the defence and then decide what is best to be done. Sometimes it is best to grant an injunction so as to maintain status quo until the trial. At other times it is best not to impose a restraint upon the defendant to leave him free to go ahead. The reason is because the defendant if he is right is entitled to publish it and the law will not intervene to suppress freedom of speech except when it is abused.' 14. As regards the decisions of our Supreme Court and the High Courts referred to by the counsel on both sides, it has to be noted that none of them cases where a defence of 'fair dealing' was put forward directly as a defence. The Supreme Court in R.G. Anand v. M/s Delux Films and Others (AIR 1978 S.C. 1613) which was a case where literary piracy or plagiarism was put forward and denied has held thus: 'One of the surest and the safest test to determine whether or not there has been vilation of copyright is to see if the reader, spectator or the viewer after having read or seen both the work is clearly of the opinion and gets an unmistakable impression that the subsequent work appears to be a copy of the original.' It has also been clearly laid down in the above decision that 'there can be no copyright in an idea, subject matter, themes, plots or historical or legendary facts and violation of the copyright in such cases is confined to the form, manner and arrangement and expression of the idea by the author of the copyrighted work.' 15. Keeping in mind the above principles of law and the facts and circumstances of the cases, it is necessary to consider whether the plaintiffs have succeeded in establishing prima facie case of infringement of the copyright to get an order of interim injunction as granted by the learned District Judge in this case. 16. For a proper consideration of the above question, it may be useful to have at least a hoard idea about the theme, events, characters and certain other important features of the drama and the counter drama. 17. It was in 1952 that the drama was written by Thoppil Bhasi. At the time, Bhasi was an active worker of the Communist Party of India and in fact he wrote it while he was living in political hiding. The main theme of story of the drama is the touching story of the oppressed and depressed classes of the contemporary society in Kerala consisting mainly of agricultural and all other kinds of workers who have turned out to be revolutionaries attracted and guided by the new political ideology of the undivided Communist Party of India. It was the most popular drama of that period. The main purpose intended to be achieved by writing the drama was to organise the oppressed classes or common people of the lowest strata of the society to fight against social evils and to have a social, political and cultural revolution in the contemporary society so as to set up a new social order where the workers will be the rulers. The clarion call of the party to its followers was to unite, revolt and fight against poverty, oppression, exploitation and all other kinds of social and political evils and to sacrifice everything for the success of the clause for which they were fighting. The promise made by the party to its followers and the pubic was that they can hope for a better tomorrow and the establishment of a new system in which they will be the rulers and can live a life worthy of living. The characters in the drama fall mainly into two or three groups. The respondent (a) landlords and others belonging to rich upper classes who lead a life full of pleasure exploiting the poor uneducated and socially backward classes of society (b) socially and educationally backward classes of the society who are mainly agricultural and other kinds of workers toiling day in and day out and still living in poverty and miseries of all kinds; and (c) dedicated workers and leaders of the Communist Party. Viliya Veettil Kesavan Nair is the representative of the landlord class bent upon exploiting and harassing the working class in all respects for safeguarding their self interest. Paramupilla, Vehissar and Kallyani Amma are characters representing upper middle class people who cling on to their past glory even while struggling for existence as a result of new land legislations and other social and political changes. Mala, Karampan, Sumam, Gopalan, Mathew and Pappu are all political workers and leaders of the party. Of them Mala and Karampan are representatives of the most depressed class of people in the society. Suman, Gopalan and Mathew hail from upper or upper middle classes. Mala, a pulaya lady, considered as the most important character of the story has been characterized as an ardent party worker who have sacrificed everything for the success of the cause for which the party, herself and her people were fighting. Though Gopalan and Mala were close to each other, for a long time and were in love with each other, Gopalan ultimately falls in love with Sumam, an upper class party worker who is also the daughter of Viliya Veettil Kesavan Nair Kesavan Nair representing the exploiting classes of the society becomes a desperate, may be at the end of the drama when he found that even his own daughter has turned out to be an ardent Communist Party worker and that she has fallen in love with Gopalan whom he hates top to bottom. Though desperate, Kesavan Nair still declares that he had not been defeated so far and he is not going to be defeated hereafter also. At the end of the drama, Paramupilla, father of Gopalan who at the beginning of the drama strongly resisted and protested against the activities of workers and leaders of the party gets transform as a Communist slowly but steadily and joins with Mala, Karampana and other party workers and leaders in participating in Jadhas and raising the red flag. The drama ends when Paramupilla in an inspired mood gets the red flag held by Mala from her and declares that he wanted to hold it with both hands. The drama consists of 14 scenes. 18. It is in 1995 about 4 decades after the drama was written that the counter drama was written and published for the first time. It contains 9 scenes together with a short introductory scene are characters of the drama. Mala with a red flag, Karampan, Mathew, Pappu and Gopalan, appear together in the background of a burial ground with a martyr's memorial building therein. They appear on a lower part of the stage. Paramu Pilla and Kesavan Nair of the drama also appear, simultaneously. Dialogue spoken to by the characters in the introductory scene relate to flag, the war that was wages by Mala and others who united under the Red flag, the failure of he war waged by them. Paramupilla, a conservative upper middle class Nair Small land holder harassed by the rich landlord Kesavan Nair and helped in many ways by party workers saying that he will hereafter live as a Communist and will be in the forefront of political agitations and processions. He expresses his desire to hold the red flag aloft. Kesavan Nair declares that he is not going to admit defeat and is determined to live changing himself in tune with the changed political and social set up. The scene ends with Thoppil Bhasi's appearance on the scene saying that he has come there to see the real condition in which Mala is at present. The curtain falls with an announcement to the following effect:'Ningal Communistakki' - Counter Drama - In the theater a political Dialogue - Ningal Are Communistakki'. In the first scene the actors are the watchman of the burial ground an old man who is a character in another drama written by Bhasi and Bharathi the adopted daughter of Mala. Bharathi and the old man have come to the burial ground with the dead body of Mala to be buried there. The day happens to be the day prior to the date fixed for the swearing in the new Chief Minister elect who is none other than Gopalan, the leader with whom Mala and others have waged their struggle against oppression and fundal domination feudal. Through the dialogue between the characters of the counter drama what is sought to be conveyed is that when untimately the party has won the elections and came to power and Gopalan who had by then married Suman the daughter of Kesavan Nair after forsaking Mala and her lover is going to be sworn-in as Chief- Minister. Mala who represented the toiling masses of the depressed and oppressed class of the society had to die with a broken heart in the same old pitiable condition with shattered aspirations and hopes of a better tomorrow promised by her party and leader leaving her only daughter (adopted) in a hopeless condition. The dialogue in the scene in its entirety is about the drama, its characters, their life, about its author and the K. P. A. C. who staged the drama. Bharathi addresses the deadbody of her mother Mala and says:Mother tell these audience who have already seen this drama on more than 5000 stages, as to what has happened? What has been hidden by Trhopil Bhasi, K. P. A. C. and the Communist Party? How Mala's red flag who snatched away and handed over to Paramupilla and Keshavan Nair by Gopalan and Mathew? How they held it aloft? How they have held it aloft? How they have snatched the leadership jumping over Mala and Karampan who were in the front row all agitations. How Mala and Karampan were again contemptuously driven away for apart 64 feet away? As indicated at the end of the introductory scene what is contained in scene one is a discussion and a critical assessment about the these and events of the drama in the changed set up. The second scene of the drama is a repetition of scene No. 8 of the drama. It has been stated so at the beginning of the scene itself. All the characters and the dialogues are the same as in scene No. 8 of the drama. The comments made by Bharathi at the end of the scene alone is the addition made by the author of the counter drama and that is to this effect:'This is how Gopalan made Sumavali Amma the heroine of his own life and the party kicking the heart of the Malaj.' 19. Scene 3 is specifically indicated as a :continuation of scene 2. Bharathi, old man and he watchman are the only characters who appear in scene 3 also. Characters are involved in a keen discussion abut the conduct o f the party leaders like Gopalan and others in the drama at the time of discussion how Mala was forsaken and betrayed by Gopalan and about certain political developments of general importance which took place subsequent to the writing and staging of the drama concerning the leaders of the party and the cultural revolution which followed the staging of the drama. In scene 4 also, the characters are Bharathi, oldman, and the watchman. Bharathi and the oldman are engaged in an animated discussions about all that has happened to Bharathi, the adopted daughter of Mala, the heroine of the drama and the frontine workers of the party, Karampan, Mala's father and to their hopes for a better tomorrow. Certain political and social developments both cuneiform and past are the topics discussed by the characters. In the discussion, well-known political and social leaders like Sir C.P. Iyyankali and Com. Krishna Pillai are being referred to incidentally. It also refers to the fall of the Communist Party in Eastern Europe. A reference is even made to the famous story in Mahabharatha where Kauravas attempted to kill the Pandavas and their mother Kunthi trapping them in a building built of wax and setting fire to it. Though Pandavas getting information about the treacherous plan of the Kauravas escape from the wax building timely through an underground path, Bhima who sets fire to the wax building sees that a Nishadha woman and her five children who were given food by Kunthi get perished inside the building so as to make it appear to the Kauravas that Pandavas have really perished in the fire. The suggestion made by referring to the epic story is that the intelligent and clever upper class always escapes or succeeds whereas the depressed and oppressed class always fails or gets etheated and perished at the hands of the upper class. The entire dialogue between Barathi and the oldman is clearly a criticism of the various actions which the party had taken during the time when the drama was written and thereafter till date in Scene 5, the characters are Karampan, Sumam, Gopalan and the oldman. In fact, a portion of scene 7 of the drama has been made part of scene 5 of the counter drama. Copying has been specifically acknowledged at the very beginning of the scene itself. The only addition to the extracted portion of the drama is the comment made by the old man at the end of the scene. Scene 6 is stated to be a continuation of scene 5. In scene 6 again, the old man, Bharathi and the watchman are engaged in an animated discussion and criticism of the different ways in which the followers of the depressed classes and the upper classes within the party have behaved during the time of the political and cultural revolution and thereafter. There is even a comparison between the work done by personalities like Iyyankali and Sreenarayana Guru and that done by party and its leaders for the oppressed and depressed classes with a view to show that how insincere was the party and its leaders towards the oppressed and depressed classes for whose upliftment and welfare the party was supposed to have been built up. The suggestion is that the party and its upper class leaders were cheating the depressed and oppressed Section of its followers and were betraying them for their own personal benefit. As such the oldman suggests that they should have poets, leaders, artists, singers and philosophers from their own class and not from the upper classes who cannot at all be believed. This in short is the critical assessment made by Bharathi and old man during their dialogue in scene 6. Scene 7 again incorporates a portion of scene 13 of the drama though a very small portion. As scene 3 and 6 were continuation of scenes 2 and 5, scene 8 is also stated to be a continuation of scene 7. In scene 8 again there is a heated discussion among Bharathi, old man and the watchman about certain events and developments which took place in the past and about matters to happen hereafter as well. It again is a critical analysis of the social and political changes taking place on Kerala and in the world. Mainly what is suggested in the discussion is that persons with vested interest always try to corner power and to continue in power whatever be the changes which may happen in the social and political set up. The old man declares that success is always that of 'Valiyaveetans'. They become Congress when Congress rules, they become Communist when Communist comes into power, they would become Nexalites when Naxalites come into power. Com. Gopalan, the Chief Minister elect and Valiya Veetil Kasavan Nair his father-in-law comes to pay their respects by placing wreaths in front of the Martyr's memorial building Kesavan Nair was accompanying Gopalan to be honoured by conferring the title of Padmasree by Gopalan on that day itself. As soon as they enter the scene. Bharathi and the old man rush to the scene with the covered deadbody of Mala and then slowly removes the cloth from here face. Mala begins to speak slowly in a low voice to the effect that in the war we failed, failed. Then the old man just like a magician makes Mala stand up as if she was only sleeping till then. Thereafter in the stage a trial goes on in which Mala takes the role of a Judge. At the time when the trial was about to begin. Thoppil Bhasi enters saying of Mala that I have come again to see you and to see the real condition in which you are. At the end of the scene, the old man makes a declaration to the following effect:' But Mala, can we be satisfied with this old red flag even now? Should we not begin from where the soviets and Communes have failed? Should it not be necessary for us to read Gandhi and Lohya at least now? Is there not before us the path, Neyogi, Amte and Medha are now trading upon? Yes. We should have a new concept of freedom. A new relationship between society and nature. 'There is a further note to the effect that from here a dialogue begins. 20. From the above broad comparative analysis of the drama and the counter drama, it is evident that copying or re?production of the portions of the drama was obviously not for the purpose of re?producing the drama either as a whole or in a substantial manner to convey the same idea which the author of the drama wanted to convey. The purpose was also not to imitate the drama or to produce a drama similar to the drama misappropriating the theme, the form of presentation, the characters, the dialogues and the technique adopted in writing the drama. Except in the scenes where expressly portion of scenes from the drama are adopted or incorporated as part of the counter drama all other scenes are scenes written without copying any of the features of the drama. The theme, the ideology intended to be propagated, the events discussed and the dialogue used and the technique adopted in writing the counter drama are entirely different from that of the drama except in the portions adopted from the drama. In fact, it is more or less evident that the purpose of writing counter drama is to criticise the idea propagated by the drama and to expose to the public that the drama has failed to achieve the real object intended to be achieved by writing the same. What is intended to be conveyed through the counter drama is that though the party has succeeded in coming to political power, it has for taken or forgotten the depressed classes who have fought mainly for its success and lost everything in that process including the lives of large number of them. As in the case of drama in the counter drama also, there is a message to be conveyed to its readers and viewers. The message is the one which the old man has declared in the last scene which has already been referred to earlier. The finding for a new path to establish a new social order removing the inequalities and evils now existing in the present system is the objection to be achieved. The dialogue spoken to be the characters of the counter drama are mainly criticism of the drama and the contemporary social and political developments taking place in Kerala and outside the Keralal. Often references are made to well?known social and political leaders and historical incidents which are consideres as milestones in the progress of society in Keralal. It may be extremely difficult to hold at least at this stage of the case that there are no new thoughts or new ideas in the counter drama and no labour and skill of his own was used by the 1st defendant in writing the counter drama and that it is a mere reproduction or imitation of the drama with inconsequential change effected here and there merely to escape from the charge of plagearism of literary piracy that apart even in respect of the 3 or 4 scenes where portions of the drama have been adopted as such, there is prima facie force in the submission that it was for the purpose of recapilating the important events in the drama that they were copied as such in the counter drama. Technique used is to reproduce or reenact part of drama from a raised portion of the stage and in succeeding scene staged in a lower part of the stage as a continuation of the scene make criticism of the important events directly dealt with in the drama in the light of the subsequent developments through the dialogue spoken to by the characters in the counter drama. Prima facie, I am inclined to take the view that the attempt was not to reproduce either a scene or parts of a scene in its entirely with a single comment made at the end of the quotation for conveying the same idea for a rival purpose, namely to reproduce the drama itself or part of it for monetary benefit causing loss to the owners of the copyright. The comment made at the end of the reproduction seems to be not one used only as a cover to mask the copying. It used to be discussed at length in the succeeding scene in the own language of the author of the counter drama without borrowing anything from the drama. In fact, such discussion used to be severe criticism of the theme and the ideology and philosophy of the author of the drama and the party and other connected matters. 'Whether such criticisms are fully justifiable or well-founded or bona fide is a matter to be decided after the entire evidence is adduced and duly considered in the case. The only point to be noted is that appropriation or part of drama as part of the counter drama was not for the same purpose for which the drama was written and was for the purpose of critism of the theme, events and the ideology of the book and its author. At any rate, it was not for the purpose of imitating or reproducing the drama like the copyrighted drama or to produce the same drama with some insignificant changes here and there. By no stretch of imagination one can come to such a conclusion in this case. There is every reason at lease prima facie to think as contended on behalf of the appellants that the portions of the drama were made part of the drama only to make the criticism of the drama and the events discussed in the drama more effective and dramatic. The counter drama is a criticism of the drama only in part. It is not a work in which the drama and its author alone are criticized. Substantial portion of the counter drama is intended also to criticize various political and social developments of current importance and to bring about a new political and social system curing those defects on account of which the movement let by the party and the characters in the drama failed according to the author of the counter drama or the characters in it. If, as a matter of fact, and as contended by the appellants, the drama, its ideas, events and its author are sought to be criticized in the counter drama along with various other contemporary developments in the political and social fields, there is strong reason to accept at least prima facie the contention that the quotations were made mainly for the purpose of effectively criticizing the drama. Without the attention of the readers and viewers being drawn to the relevant portion of the drama, the criticism to be made through the counter drama cannot be effective. Viewed in this manner, I find that there is sufficient reason to accept at least prima facie that there is strong defence case to be considered on merits put up by the defendants in opposition to the claim of the plaintiffs in the suit. 21. It was contended that even if the purpose of copying or reproduction was to criticize the portions of the drama or the ideologies of its author or the party, still, it may not amount to 'fair dealing' unless the 'defendants show that the criticism is fair and justifiable in the facts and circumstances of the case. Even assuming that the defendants in this case are under an obligation to establish that the criticism is justified in the facts and circumstances of the case, the question whether the criticism leveled are all justifiable or not is a matter to be considered in the suit itself and cannot be dealt with at this interlocutory stage. Defendant may have to be given an opportunity to establish that the criticism leveled is fair and justifiable in the facts and circumstances of the case. 22. At one stage of the argument it was submitted that there was no criticism either of the drama or its ideals, but the intention of writing the counter drams was only to level baseless allegations and accusations against the author of the drama and the party and its leaders. Even assuming that it is really so, it may not help the respondent to establish their case that there is infringement of the copyright and on that ground to get an injunction against the defendants. 23. If on the other hand, the main purpose of the author of the counter drama is to critically analyse the activities of the party and the author who was an ardent Communist Party worker while the drama was written with reference to the events which took place subsequent to the staging of the drama and the success of the party in getting political power and to express his own views or conclusions about it, the injunction ordered will really interfere with the freedom of expressing those ideas in an accepted art form. As the matters dealt with are of current importance, the prevention by injunction of the printing and publication and staging would be illegal and unjust. The counter drama in that even will altogether lose its relevance and would become practically worthless or useless, even if the suit is ultimately dismissed. 24. It is relevant in this connection to note two or three other important aspects of the case also. First of all there is no case even that there will be any competition between the drama and the counter drama even if the counter drama is printed and published or stage. By no stretch of imagination, it can even be suggested that those who wanted to read or see the drama will read the counter drama. As such, one of the relevant considerations laid down in Habbard v. Vosper (1972(2) W.L.R. 389) to be satisfied while granting injunction namely, that there is likely to be a competition between the two works is not satisfied in this case. 25. Secondly, it is to be noted that the counter drama was published as early as in January, 1995 and the suit was only instituted in July 1995 just a day prior to the date fixed for staging the drama. If the plaintiffs were aggrieved by the printing and publishing of the counter drama, there is no explanation why they have not taken any action immediately after the printing and publication of the counter drama. Though the above circumstances may not be fatal to the maintainability of the suit, it should have been taken note of while considering the question of granting an injunction as prayed for by the plaintiffs in this case. 26. Thirdly, while considering the question of reparable injury and balance of convenience, the learned District Judge ought to have taken note of the specific contention put forward by the defence that the defendants especially defendants 2 and 3 have made all arrangements for staging the counter drama spending a huge amount and that if the staging is stayed, it will result in irreparable loss and hardship to them and that if an injunction is not granted, no irreparable injury would be caused to the plaintiffs. Even if any monetary loss is likely to be caused to the plaintiffs on proving the same, the plaintiffs could be compensated by directing the defendants to pay such damages or compensation which the court deems fit. >From the case set up in the plaint itself, it is evident that even now the drama is popular and is in demand for staging profitably. The exploitation of the drama by staging the same or by printing and selling it, will not in any way be affected by the printing and sale or staging of the counter drama. So long as there is no case that the staging of the counter drama would affect the collection that is being expected from staging the drama, it may not be possible to contend that monetary loss is going to be caused to the plaintiffs as a result of staging the drama. There is also a case for the defendants that unless the counter drama is allowed to be printed, sold and stage it will loose all its relevance as the matters dealt with in it are of current importance. 27. I may also make a note of the contention raised by the plaintiffs in the plaint that there is an attempt in the counter drama to denegrade or tarnish the fair name and repute of the author of the drama. Even assuming that there is such an attempt, it cannot be treated as an infringement of the copyright and no injunction can be obtained in this suit on that basis. However, in this connection. I may record the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant that in the future publications of the counter drama, they will drop the following sentences from the script of the drama: It was also submitted that while staging the drama also, the above sentences will not be used as part of the drama. 28. In the light of the discussion made above, I am constrained to take the view that the learned Judge was not justified in an injunction in the facts and circumstances of this case. In my view, the defendants have prima facie succeeded in establishing that copying of portions of the drama even if it is held to be substantial portions, was for the purpose of criticism and as such it will only amount to a fair dealing' and not an infringement of the copyright. If the defendants have succeeded in establishing prima facie that they have the statutory defense of 'fair dealing' to put up against the plaint claim, it may not be possible to find that the plaintiffs have succeeded in a establishing a prima facie case of infringement of the copyright even if admittedly there is copying of portions of the drama in the counter drama. In the light of the above findings, I would set aside the order granting the injunction and would dismiss the application for injunction. 29. As the injunction application is being dismissed, it is absolutely necessary that the trial and disposal of the suit should be expedited to the maximum extent possible. Both the parties have expressed their readiness to get ready in the matter at any time the court decides the case to be posted for trial. In the circumstances, there will be a direction to the court below to complete all pre-trial steps within a maximum period of three months and to post the case to a definite date after the expirty of the three months and to proceed with trial till the end, posting the case on a day top day basis to the extent possible. 30. In the light of the somewhat detailed discussion of the various aspects of the case contained in this judgment. I would specifically made it clear that none of the observations and findings contained in the judgment about the merits of any of the contentions raised in the suit should prejudice the trial and disposal of the suit and the suit should be disposed unaffected by such observations and findings in this judgment. Forward a copy of the judgment along with the records if any records have been called for. C.M.A. is accordingly allowed. Order passed by the court below is set aside I.A. No. 395/1995 will stand dismissed. The parties will bear their respective costs. Cross Reference: 1996 PTR 142 (Kerala High Court) On 9/12/04 7:02 PM, "Shamnad Basheer" wrote: > Dear Ritika, > > While I agree with Jayna, I would caution that if > possible, you intersperse the quotes with some > comments as well-just so that you better your chances > of remaining in the 'fair dealing' category. A fair > use analysis would, to a large extent, depend on both > the quality and quantity (more so the quality..) of > the quoted material, in comparison with the original > work. > > If for example, you had quoted about 90% of Rummans > work, you could well run into problems-it may be > difficult to qualify a taking of 90% of an authors > work as 'fair dealing'-despite the fact that this > taking is for the purpose of critique.. > > Then again, the law would also look at the nature of > your use of her work. If you have only quoted from her > work, without additions/comments of your own, you > could run the risk of falling outside the 'fair > dealing' category. > > On a side note, the fact that the workshop proceedings > do not have a copyright notice or a statement that you > cannot quote is not prejudicial to their claim against > you (should one exist in the first place). Copyright > exists by virtue of creation of the work and a notice > is immaterial to a claim against copying (though it > may certainly push the case a little more in favour of > the copyright owner). > > The above holds true for credits as well. Giving > credit to a borrowed piece of work may not absolve you > of copyright liability-if your borrowing exceeds the > scope of the 'fair dealing' defence (though of course, > it may help your case a little more..) > > I hope this helps. > > Shamnad > > > > . --- Ritika wrote: >> Thanx jayani, i am forwarding your mail on the >> commons law list for a >> wider discussion >> >> cheers >> ritika >> >> jaynakothari at justice.com wrote: >>> Dear Ritika, >>> >>> I read your blog where you have quoted from >> Rumman's >>> work. As far the practice goes, you can still use >>> Rumman's work even after it is published by Sage, >> by >>> citing the new published verison of the article >> and >>> thus giving acknowledgement to the author in your >> blog. >>> Copyright law does not prevent use of any >> author's >>> work for research and critique (which would >> classify as >>> 'fair use') provided proper acknowledgement is >> given to >>> the author and the copyright owner (i.e. Sage >>> Publishers). You don't need the Publisher's >> permission >>> for just quoting it on your blog, provided you >> have >>> cited the piece correctly. >>> >>> best, >>> Jayna >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 16:42:17 +0530, Ritika wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Dear All, >>>> >>>> Writing this mail for advise from list members. >>>> >>>> I have been maintaining a blog on my ongoing >> research >>>> on Slaugther >>>> Houses in Delhi. This blog is an attempt to build >>>> community of >>>> commentators around what i am excavating and >> thinking. >>>> >>>> >>>> (Read posting titled: HYGEINE, LANGUAGE AND >>>> APPRENTICESHIP) >>>> >>>> On reading some discussion papers of a workshop on >>>> Education, by Konrad >>>> Adenaur Foundation (6th - 9th, April 2003) i liked >>> >>> what >>> >>>> was presented by >>>> Ms. Rumman Hameed, and quoted excerpts from her >>>> workshop presentation >>>> text in my blog. >>>> >>>> She has written to me that, that her article from >> the >>>> same presentation >>>> will be appearing in a publication by Sage. She >> has >>>> asked me to withdraw >>>> the quote or else to seek permission from the >>>> publishers or Adenaur >>>> Foundation. >>>> >>>> The Adenaur Foundation's workshop proceedings >>>> (photocopied - spiral >>>> bound) has no text on it forbidding any quoting or >> for >>>> that matter any >>>> further circulation. Author's text also does not >> carry >>>> any `do not >>>> quote` sticker. >>>> >>>> I need to reply to Rumman as she is also a young >>>> scholar putting her >>>> tentative feet into the world of academic paper >>>> publishing. But, i >>>> really like what she has stated in her paper and >> would >>>> like all my blog >>>> readers to engage with these observations. >>>> >>>> Now, what am i supposed to make of all this? Do as >>>> researchers, we have >>>> to wait for publishing houses to give permissions >> for >>>> comparing, >>>> appreciating, critiquing, our peers' work? >>>> >>>> I am a little baffled and distressed by all this, >> and >>>> need all of yours >>>> collective insights into this. >>>> >>>> yours in anticipation >>>> >>>> Ritika >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Ritika Shrimali >>>> The Sarai Programme >>>> >>>> http://blog.sarai.net/users/ritika >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> commons-law mailing list >>>> commons-law at sarai.net >> >>> https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/commons-law >>> >>> >>> Ashira Law >>> Advocates and Legal Consultants >>> 50/6 Palace Road >>> Bangalore 56 00 52 >>> Ph: 0091-80-2261090 >>> _________________________________________________ >>> FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community >>> http://www.FindLaw.com >>> Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email! >>> http://mail.Justice.com >> >> >> -- >> Ritika Shrimali >> The Sarai Programme >> >> http://blog.sarai.net/users/ritika >> _______________________________________________ >> commons-law mailing list >> commons-law at sarai.net >> https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/commons-law >> > > ________________________________________________________________________ > Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your life partner online > Go to: http://yahoo.shaadi.com/india-matrimony > _______________________________________________ > commons-law mailing list > commons-law at sarai.net > https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/commons-law From lawrence at altlawforum.org Mon Sep 13 10:53:25 2004 From: lawrence at altlawforum.org (Lawrence Liang) Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 10:53:25 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] More on the telegu film industry piracy story In-Reply-To: <20040912155833.15910.qmail@webmail27.rediffmail.com> Message-ID: Hi all Some more follow up on the story posted by orshant a few days ago Lawrence ------ Forwarded Message From: vishwas devaiah Reply-To: vishwas devaiah Date: 12 Sep 2004 15:58:33 -0000 To: Subject: piracy The Telugu film industry is literally taking its fight against video piracy to the streets. In its efforts to curb piracy, the industry rallied behind Telugu actor Mahesh Babu after Warangal Police registered a case against Babu and his fans for allegedly ransacking two video shops and destroying pirated CD's and VCD's of his mega budget film Arjun. However, the actor who has denied the charge obtained a stay against his arrest from the High Court. According to Babu, nearly 30,000 pirated CD's of Arjun have been eating heavily into the film's profits, which was released just three weeks ago. The film at Rs 18 crore is the costliest Telugu film made so far. "At that point of time it was not the question of my reputation. We worked on Arjun for almost two years. I have put in everything I have in the film and it is really disturbing when there are pirated VCD's all over the market," says Babu. Babu's action has received unequivocal support from his industry brethren. On Saturday, top actors and producers met Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Y S Rajasekhara Reddy and requested him to help industry in its efforts against video piracy, that had been causing losses of nearly Rs 200 crore per year to producers. "Some kind of quasi-governmental body is needed so that raids can be conducted against piracy. For general police these white collar offences is not a very important thing but for us it is a matter of life and death," feels D Suresh Babu, President, Producer's Council. Telugu film industry is the most recent one to affected by video piracy after opening of the overseas rights of the films. With the steep increase in production costs, the industry seems to have taken its fight against piracy literally to the streets in a bid to stay alive. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/commons-law/attachments/20040913/6782d5d8/attachment.html From ritika at sarai.net Mon Sep 13 13:08:41 2004 From: ritika at sarai.net (Ritika) Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 13:08:41 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Regarding publication ADVICE Message-ID: <41454E81.9030902@sarai.net> Thanx jayani, lawrence and Shamnad What thus emerges is that blog is my personal way of making ongoing research public. SO no matter how random of thoughts i may put into my blog, while talking about someone else's work, i'll have to be critical/analytical and cannot just quote work for the pure fun of it being an interesting text. I'll make the changes. (just wondering then how personal is my blog??) Just another clarification. I am kind of obsessed with the idea of making a log of whatever happens to my work. Can i use the mails that have been exchanged on the list on my blog as comments to my jottings..?? Ideally i would have like it if the conversation could happen on the blog, but because it didn't happen, would it be fair on my part to post all the comments (including rummans'.. which was personal mail to me) on my blog? cheers ritika -- Ritika Shrimali The Sarai Programme http://blog.sarai.net/users/ritika From sudhir at circuit.sarai.net Mon Sep 13 15:49:30 2004 From: sudhir at circuit.sarai.net (sudhir at circuit.sarai.net) Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 15:49:30 +0530 (IST) Subject: [Commons-Law] more on patenting dosas Message-ID: <1178.61.95.194.1.1095070770.squirrel@61.95.194.1> http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/848383.cms A lot of paper, no masala for dosa [ MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 2004 12:59:20 AM ] This piece is provoked by a couple of recent newspaper reports on ‘copyright’ for dosa, etc., and ‘patent’ for Mysore silk. In the first case, apparently, Parliament had posed a query to the government about the possibility of ‘copyrighting’ dosa, vada, upma, dhokla and golgappa. In the second case, the report was that Mysore silk had been “patented” and saris weaved in any part of the world other than Karnataka could not be called Mysore silk. As if that was not enough, a prominent FM radio channel in New Delhi, in its prime time programme, was interviewing its listeners on the propriety of patenting dosas! Looks like the intellectual property fundas are all getting mixed up. Intellectual property (IP) rights are significant assets of a developing country. A clearer understanding of IP concepts is beneficial for all whether they are eating dosa or McDosa. Those who wanted to ‘copyright’ dosas may wish to know that copyright protects originally expressed ideas in literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works as well as cinematograph films, sound recordings and broadcasts. One cannot copyright an idea per se, but the literary, dramatic, musical or artistic expression of that idea. Copyright, therefore, protects works such as novels, poems, paintings, sculptures, music, movies, plays etc. At the risk of disappointing Parliament, it is, therefore, not possible to copyright dosa, vada, upma, dhokla and golgappa or even the manner of their preparation. Having said that Parliament may have to find other effective means to guard dosas. As for the alleged ‘patent’ for Mysore silk, patent rights are granted to an inventor for a novel and industrially useful invention for a limited period after which the right to copy the invention passes into the public domain. Manufacturing Mysore silk is obviously not a novel invention and that makes it impossible for ‘patenting’ the same. This brings back to mind the US patent for turmeric which the Indian government managed to get revoked and which was the centre of numerous media debates. The turmeric patent was revoked because the wound healing properties of turmeric were nothing novel and were already known and used in India for centuries. Much same way, dosa as an eatable or its process of preparation has been in the public domain for long and would not qualify for a patent unless some novel and industrially useful recipe or method which was never employed so far for making dosa is invented! 'Mysore silk', is a geographical indication and that is why identical saris woven anywhere else in the world other than Mysore cannot be called ‘Mysore silks’. A geographical indication is a name that designates certain goods to possess a particular quality, characteristics or reputation which owe their origin to the geographical area concerned. They are inextricably linked to a country’s culture and traditions. Some examples are Basmati rice, Darjeeling tea, Malabar pepper, Kashmir shawls, Feni, etc. Geographical Indication of Goods (Registration & Protection) Act, 1999 now enables registration of these names. Geographical indications are often confused with trademarks and expressions like ‘Basmati trademark’ are often heard and seen. Trademark is a word, device, sign or symbol capable of graphic representation, used in the course of trade to identify the source of a particular good. Essentially, it distinguishes goods of one proprietor from those of another. For example, in the cola market, Pepsi and Coke are different trademarks, indicating two different sources of origin for colas. Hence, while trademark is a private right, geographical indication is a collective right. While unabashed and indiscriminate invasions by the west on traditional and cultural heritage of a community are unacceptable, one needs to gracefully accept the inevitable effects of liberalisation a la McDosa. McDosa is no usurpation of dosas or Indian culture. Such uproar arises mainly from ignorance of IP concepts. In a country like India which has a rich cultural diversity, there are much larger issues that ought to get discussed such as documentation of our vast traditional knowledge in medicines, food and agriculture, registration of our numerous geographical indications, creating awareness and educating public on copyright protection in the digital and internet context, etc. In doing so, apart from becoming an intellectually alive nation moving with times, we are also plugging all loopholes for the west from attacking our age old traditions, etc. But before all, to start with, we should get our IP fundas straight so that we do not waste time finding out the possibility of ‘patenting’ and ‘copyrighting’ dosas! (The author is an IP lawyer at the New Delhi-based IP law firm K&S Partners) From rohangeorge at gmail.com Tue Sep 14 12:42:51 2004 From: rohangeorge at gmail.com (Rohan George) Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 12:42:51 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Corporate Censorship: The internet as the new frontier? Message-ID: How the hell do corporations think they have a right to censor what people can read or not? Government censorship is already a complicated issue. Now we've got big e- companies snipping away at our content as well.This could set a dangerous and scary precedent. I believe its important to send some sort of strong message to ebay to discourage them from trying things like this. http://www.ncbuy.com/news/2004-09-13/1010559.html LOUISVILLE, Ky. (Wireless Flash) -- A new book criticizing the pharmaceutical industry for causing the obesity epidemic has been banned for auction by Ebay who won't give a reason why. The controversial book, "Why is America So FAT? "(Rlk Press), is critical of the pharmaceutical company as well as the FDA for making Americans plump and lists many fat-inducing prescription drugs. Author Ben Kennedy claims Ebay didn't give him a good reason why they wont auction his book, but instead "gave me b.s." He speculates one reason is the wife of the founder of Ebay worked for a pharmaceutical company and the book doesn't shed the best light on the industry. Ebay's priorities may be inconsistent as Kennedy wonders, "They have no problem with listing pornographic material, but they do with my book." Otherwise, the book has been "well received," but still Kennedy is fuming saying, "Ebay's becoming an arrogant company, they're just doing whatever they want. It sets a bad precedent when you start banning books." From rajlakshmi_nesargi at yahoo.com Tue Sep 14 15:23:56 2004 From: rajlakshmi_nesargi at yahoo.com (Rajlakshmi Nesargi) Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 02:53:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Commons-Law] Australian judgement on DVD and Copyright Message-ID: <20040914095356.13967.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> As usual....a piece of info DVD copyright test case goes to the High Court By Sarah Jones SYDNEY, Sept 14 AAP - A test case on DVD and computer games copyright laws to be heard in the High Court next year could have far reaching implications for Australian consumers and industry players, a law firm said today. Last year Sony Computer Entertainment successfully sued a Sydney-based mod-chip trader Eddy Stevens, claiming he contravened the Copyright Act by selling and installing "mod chips" in Sony Playstation machines. Mod chips allow users to overcome Playstation's security system so they can play pirated or copied games, legitimate gamed bought more cheaply outside Australia, or make personal back-up copies. According to the law firm representing Mr Stevens, Gadens Lawyers, the case has far reaching implications for consumers and a wide range of industry players including video rental operators and computer games manufacturers such as the likes of Sony and Microsoft. Managing partner and solicitor in the appeal case Michael Bradley said the decision to take the case to the High Court was important because the debate between the rights of copyright owners and consumers had been very much skewed in favour of copyright owners. He said a key issue for consumers was whether it was permissible to make personal back-up copies of games or DVDs they had purchased, or use games or DVDs in Australia purchased legitimately overseas, without inadvertently breaching the Copyright Act. "The case also has the potential to impact a range of industries, such as the video rental industry which... may see movie studios charge higher prices for rental movies which could be passed onto consumers," Mr Bradley said. The case centres around the question of whether a copy is made of a computer game when it is played in the DVD drive of a computer or gameplayer such as a Playstation, because it is copied through the RAM of the player while it is being played. A second key issue revolves around critical circumvention device provisions inserted into the Copyright Act under the Digital Agenda Amendments in 2000. The provisions were designed to prohibit the making and selling of devices that get around technological protection measures that manufacturers have placed on their products to prevent unauthorised access and copying. In the Sony versus Stevens case, Sony claimed that its games were protected by such a measure, and the mod chips installed by Mr Stevens were a circumvention device and were therefore illegal, Gadens said. The Federal Court originally found that the security system on Playstation games were not a technological protection measure, because it did not prevent or deter copyright infringement. However, the Full Court of the Federal Court later overturned the decision following an appeal in July 2003. The case is expected to be heard in the High Court around March next year. Mr Bradley is working with counsel John Nicholas SC and Christian Dimitriadis on the appeal. ===== "You must be the change you wish to see in the world. First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win"-Mahatma Gandhi __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From vivek at sarai.net Tue Sep 14 15:14:21 2004 From: vivek at sarai.net (Vivek Narayanan) Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 15:14:21 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Sarai-CSDS fellowships Message-ID: <4146BD75.70900@sarai.net> CALL FOR PROPOSALS – SARAI-CSDS INDEPENDENT FELLOWSHIPS, 2004-05 Applications Invited for Independent Research Fellowships The Sarai Programme, Centre for the Study of Developing Societies, Delhi Sarai is a public initiative of media practitioners and scholars looking at media cultures and urban life. Sarai's interests are in the field of old and new media, information and communication technologies, free software, cinema, and urban space --its politics, built form, ecology, culture and history--with a strong commitment to making knowledge available in the public domain. Sarai is a programme of the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies, Delhi. (For more information, visit _www.sarai.net_ ) *Who Can Apply? * Sarai invites independent researchers, media practitioners, software designers and programmers, urbanists, architects, artists and writers, as well as students (postgraduate level and above) and university/college faculty to apply for support with regard to research-driven projects. We support projects from all over India, and have an established track record of supporting deserving project proposals that originate outside the metropolitan centres of Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai and Bangalore. We would like to see the focus of our fellowship programme expand to support more research in smaller towns and non-urban areas. The duration of the fellowship is six months, beginning from 1 January 2005. The final presentation of the research project will be made in Delhi in August 2005. *Why Research ? What Do We Mean by Research? * Sarai is committed to generating public knowledge and creativity through research. By research we mean both archival and field research, practice-based research and forays into theoretical work, as well as any process or activity of an experimental or creative nature--in the audiovisual media, for instance, as well as in journalism, the humanities and social sciences, computing and architecture. We are especially interested in supporting projects that formulate precise and cogent intellectual questions, reflect on modes of understanding that implicate knowledge production within a critical social framework, foreground processes of gathering information and of creating links between bodies of information. We also encourage research that is based on a strong engagement with archival materials and imaginative ways of tackling the question of the public rendition of research activity. **The Experience of Previous Years** This is the fourth year in which Sarai is calling for proposals for such fellowships. We would like to describe how the process has worked in previous years, as an indication of what applicants should expect. We have so far supported a hundred research projects over the past three years, including work in the areas of popular culture, literature, urban ethnography, architecture, geography, creative writing, graphic arts, new media, cinema studies, FLOSS software, histories of media forms and practices, sexuality, studies of technology and culture, and oral history. Successful applicants have included freelance researchers, academics, media practitioners, writers, journalists and activists. (For a detailed overview of successful proposals from the previous years, see _http://www.sarai.net/community/fellow.htm_) The project proposals, postings and reports were submitted in English, Hindi or a combination of the two languages. We have seen that projects which set important but practical and modest goals were usually successful, whereas those that may have been conceptually sound but lacked sufficient motivation to actually approach a research objective in the field usually did not sustain themselves beyond the interim stage. Sarai interacts closely with the researchers over the period of the fellowship, and the independent fellows make a public presentation of their work at Sarai at the end of their fellowship period. During the term of their fellowship each fellow is required to make a posting to the Sarai Reader List every month, reporting on the development of their work. These postings, which are archived, are an important means by which the research process reaches a wider discursive community. They also help us to trace the progress of work during the grant period, and understand how the research interfaces with a larger public. Fellows also receive structured but informal feedback from Sarai in stages during the course of their work. Submissions by fellows include written reports and essays, photographs, tape recordings, pamphlets, maps, drawings and html presentations. On occasion, fellows have also incorporated performance into their final presentations. **What Happens to the Research Projects?** The annual research projects add to our now substantial archival collections on urban space and media culture. These are proving to be very significant value additions to the availability of knowledge resources in the public domain. Researchers are free to publish or render any part or all of their projects in any forms, independently of Sarai (but with due acknowledgment of the support that they have received from Sarai). Sarai Independent Research Fellows have gone on to publish articles in journals, work towards the making of films, exhibitions, websites, multimedia works and performances, and the creation of graphic novels, soundworks and books. We actively encourage all such efforts. **What We Are Looking For** Like previous years, this year too we are looking for proposals that are imaginatively articulated, experimental and methodologically innovative, but pragmatic and backed up by a well argued work plan which sets out a timetable for the project, as well as suggests how the support from Sarai will help in generating/providing specific resources (human and material) that the project needs. Suggested Themes: Sarai's interests lie in the city, and in media. Broadly speaking, any proposal that looks at the urban condition or at media, is eligible. More specifically, themes may be as diverse as habitation, sexuality, labour, migration, surveillance, intellectual property, social/digital interfaces, urban violence, street life, technologies of urban control, health and the city, the political economy of media forms, digital art and culture, or anything that the applicants feel will resonate with the philosophy and interests that motivate Sarai's work. We are particularly interested in supporting work that delves into what we are beginning to call 'Histories of the New'. This can include excavating the histories of different forms of media practice (early photography, cinema, print, radio, the music industry), as well as the histories of urban spaces and phenomena, neighbourhoods in cities, the evolution of utilities, transport and communications networks (electricity, telegraphy, telephony, the early Internet in India, railways, roads, urban public transport), labour, histories (including oral histories and biographical research) of dissident political movements, milieus and cultures and people associated with them. Again, Sarai supports innovative and inventive modes of rendering work into the public domain. Proposals which pay attention to this principle will be particularly valued. Also, proposals that include the collection of materials for our archive will be appreciated: in the past, fellows have submitted photographs, recordings, printed matter, maps, multimedia and posters related to the subject of their study to this archive. Preferred Approaches: We especially welcome the articulation, within the text of the proposal, of innovative and interdisciplinary methodologies that gesture towards how research, practice, and delivery or rendition methods will dovetail into each other in the project. **Conditions** Applicants should be resident in India, and should have an account in any bank operating in India. The research fellowship would be available for up to six months and for a maximum amount of Rs 60,000. The fellowships do not require the fellows to be present at Sarai. Fellowship holders will be free to pursue their primary occupations, if any. **What Do You Need To Send?** There are no application forms. Simply post your: - Proposal (not more than 1000 words) - A clear work plan (not more than one page) - An updated CV (not more than two pages) - Work samples (maximum two) - Envelopes should be marked - "Attention: Short Term Independent Research Fellowship" (Email proposals will not be considered). Proposals may be sent in English or Hindi. Mail these to: Independent Fellowship Programme, Sarai, Centre for the Study of Developing Societies, 29 Rajpur Road, Delhi 110054, India. Inquiries: vivek at sarai.net Last date for submission: October 30, 2004 The list of successful proposals for 2004-2005 will be notified on the Sarai website by 15 December 2004 Note: Proposals from teams, partnerships, collectives and faculty are welcome, as long as the grant amount is administered by a single individual, and the funds are deposited in a single bank account in the name of an individual, partnership, registered body or institutional entity. Applicants who apply to other institutions for support for the same project will not be disqualified, provided they inform Sarai that support is being sought (or has been obtained) from another institution. The applicants should inform Sarai about the identity of the other institution. From rajlakshmi_nesargi at yahoo.com Wed Sep 15 10:50:28 2004 From: rajlakshmi_nesargi at yahoo.com (Rajlakshmi Nesargi) Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 22:20:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Commons-Law] Piracy news from Europe Message-ID: <20040915052028.45760.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> another piece of info.... The piracy ring is considered one of Europe's largest News Story by Scarlet Pruitt SEPTEMBER 14, 2004 (IDG NEWS SERVICE) - The noose appeared to be tightening around one of Europe's largest software counterfeiting rings as a German court sentenced a second member of the network to prison yesterday and handed a sentence to his father for helping run front operations. After an 18-week trial, a criminal court in Stuttgart, Germany, sentenced the convicted software pirate to three years in prison without parole for copyright infringement and selling counterfeit Microsoft Corp. software. The court also convicted the defendant's father for his participation in the counterfeiting scheme, issuing him a 16-month jail term and requiring 100 hours of community service. The defendant, Dieter Rimmele, appears to be in his 30s, while his father, Hubert Rimmele, is 58 years old, according to sources close to the case. Dieter Rimmele had previously been arrested in 1999 for software manipulation and was sentenced to a year in jail. The three-year sentence he received comes on top of the 10 months he has already served in jail since being arrested late last year. In this latest conviction, Rimmele's parents were investigated for helping him manage front operations to conceal his illegal activities, but his mother wasn't convicted because of health reasons, sources said. The sentencing of the father-son team comes three months after another convicted software pirate and leader of the same counterfeiting ring, Ralph Blasek, was given five and a half years in prison for selling counterfeit Microsoft goods. All three convictions resulted from a massive investigation by German police into the counterfeiting ring, according to sources close to the case. The defendants tampered with genuine Microsoft educational software, which educational institutions purchase at a discounted rate, and then sold it as full versions for a much higher price. The piracy ring is considered one of Europe's largest, responsible for counterfeiting over $100 million worth of software over just the past few years, sources said. In addition, the group allegedly produced counterfeit software at a CD manufacturing plant in Germany, which primarily produces music CDs. Two more alleged members of the same counterfeiting ring are currently on trial, sources said. A Microsoft representatives said today that the company is pleased with the crackdown and said it would continue working with local police enforcement agencies to quash illegal software sales. ===== "You must be the change you wish to see in the world. First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win"-Mahatma Gandhi __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From mrinalinikpillai at gmail.com Thu Sep 16 11:02:36 2004 From: mrinalinikpillai at gmail.com (Mrinalini Kochupillai) Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 11:02:36 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Patents for observed problems? Message-ID: I came across an interesting query from a scientist last week - can an observed phenomenon - say - the fact that stiff knees get stiffer in winter and ought threfore be given warmth - be patented? Can parts of it be patented? Say - if X were to realise that stiff knees go stiffer in winter, Y were to give the solution that stiff knees should therefore be kept warm in winter and later Z were to come up with a method - that stiff knees can be kept warm in winter using hot water bags, then would Z get a patent (a) only over the process/method of keeping knees warm, or (b) would he also get a patent over the underlying idea that stiff knees ought to be kept warm in winter? I would think that a logical conclusion (problem)derived from an observed phenomena would not merit a patent protection - a method of overcoming the problem alone would get protection - simply becasue ideas cant be protected. Thus, if some one were to come up with a new means of keeping the knee warm in winters, he would not be infringing Z's patent. - Am I right in so thinking? Best Wishes Mrinalini From lawrence at altlawforum.org Thu Sep 16 12:42:54 2004 From: lawrence at altlawforum.org (Lawrence Liang) Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 12:42:54 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Piracy debate on isyourjobgoingoffshore.com Message-ID: Hi all A friend sent a link to this rather fascinating and bizarre discussion on a discussion group, on the usual outsourcing evils and virtues kind of discussion, but this one focused on the piracy claims and counter claims that were being made. Thought it would be of interest to the group Lawrence The link for the site is http://www.isyourjobgoingoffshore.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2808 09-07-2004, 02:56 AM Mario Registered User Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 10 Those evil Indians If we have to believe the rants of hater of the Indians on this board, Indians are getting jobs only through stealing. They are stealing jobs by selling themselves cheap.... their quality has got nothing to do with it. Infact, Indians are of very cheap quality. So if Microsoft is employing 100 to 200 odd developers in India, then Indians are evil. Nevermind the hundreds of thousands of ALL KINDS OF Pre-installed LEGAL copies of windows software that many people are buying ( just count the Andra Pradesh state government's legal purchase of windows software ). Nevermind, the legal enforcement of Piracy rules by various Indian state governments unlike China whose communist government actually issued a directive NOT TO BUY ANY FOREIGN SOFTWARE. I suppose some people really like their Chinese take-out food and don't want to talk about the chinese THEFT lest they anger all those wonderful chinese restauranteurs. So when these haters are sitting in their Chinese made sofas while eating Chinese take-out dinner heated in a Chinese made Microwave oven surfing Internet through their Chinese made Wireless LAN cards/ routers and watching Chinese made T.V., they suddenly remember how those evil Indians are stealing their jobs. #2 09-07-2004, 08:39 AM skagarawal Moderator Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: India - Gurgaon Posts: 492 Hey Mario, I do not think this site represents that. Yes there are a few people who have strong views, but so are on the other side. I would suggest that you go through the threads and see a lot of good stuff been put forward from various people and then add to that. Those will be far more useful to all of us here.. Let us see some strong stuff, on the side of discussion from your side, rather a few remarks, that are best ignored. __________________ sk the learned one #3 09-07-2004, 11:05 AM Mario Registered User Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 10 Quote: Originally Posted by skagarawal Hey Mario, I do not think this site represents that. Yes there are a few people who have strong views, but so are on the other side. I would suggest that you go through the threads and see a lot of good stuff been put forward from various people and then add to that. Those will be far more useful to all of us here.. Let us see some strong stuff, on the side of discussion from your side, rather a few remarks, that are best ignored. The following remarks are FACTS "sitting in their Chinese made sofas while eating Chinese take-out dinner heated in a Chinese made Microwave oven surfing Internet through their Chinese made Wireless LAN cards/ routers and watching Chinese made T.V" Just take a look at the "Made in ...." labels on all the big ticket items in your home. #4 09-07-2004, 12:08 PM millere6455 Registered User Join Date: May 2004 Location: Detroit Posts: 248 Quote: Originally Posted by Mario If we have to believe the rants of hater of the Indians on this board, Indians are getting jobs only through stealing. They are stealing jobs by selling themselves cheap.... their quality has got nothing to do with it. Infact, Indians are of very cheap quality. Nobody on this board ever claimed that Indians were not legitimate users and buyers of IT related products. BUT: When an Indian comes to the US to destroy the livelihood of an American worker through "Knowledge Transfer" he is a THIEF. No changing that! Attempting to place the blame on the "greedy CEO" or the "failed American system" does not change the fact that you are engaging in an act of thievery and that your reputation has been ruined because you are now thought of as an Economic Terrorist. Yell, scream, call me names or whatever it is you want to do, but that will not change the fact that you are a thief. And think about this: If the Hindu mind is so superior to the American mind, why can't the Hindu worker stay home and develop the Indian market without the need to come to the US and ruin somebody's life? Hard questions to answer, but should be easy for the obviously superior "Indian Hindu Brain"... And before you accuse me of being a "hater" how do you think you appear to Americans whose lives you are ruining? Not alot of love there either... __________________ working in retail Last edited by millere6455 : 09-07-2004 at 12:11 PM. #5 09-07-2004, 01:26 PM Mario Registered User Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 10 Quote: Originally Posted by millere6455 Nobody on this board ever claimed that Indians were not legitimate users and buyers of IT related products. Haaaa...... wouldn't it be nice for America if Indians would just buy Microsoft products without demanding that Microsoft should create a minor portion ( about 200 developers) of it's total global workforce in India. May be Indians should just play dead.... isn't that right Mr.Miller ? Quote: Originally Posted by millere6455 BUT: When an Indian comes to the US to destroy the livelihood of an American worker through "Knowledge Transfer" he is a THIEF. Indian comes here with the purpose of destroying an American worker ? Ohmigod...... how evil. I suppose the lure of earning American dollars has got nothing to do with them coming here..... destroying an American worker is a much greater lure. What evil intentions. Quote: Originally Posted by millere6455 you are engaging in an act of thievery and that your reputation has been ruined because you are now thought of as an Economic Terrorist. Engaging in an act of thievery ? May be when an Indian goes for a job interview, he should just play dumb. Would that stop the act of thievery ? Quote: Originally Posted by millere6455 Yell, scream, call me names or whatever it is you want to do, but that will not change the fact that you are a thief. I am a thief ? Looks like the slander culture prevalent in the current political discourse in the country has finally gotten to you. May I give you some words of wisdom ..... Of course, you might already be a wise person and might know this. You should never make a slanderous comment on a person that you know nothing about. As a tech lead at a company that develops proprietary trading systems for professional traders, I regularly interview software developers for my team. I am also a soon to be entrepreneur about to begin negotiations with Venture capital firms. Quote: Originally Posted by millere6455 And think about this: If the Hindu mind is so superior to the American mind, Ohmigod...... thanks for reminding my religion. It's been so long I referred to myself as a Hindu ..... thanks again. Quote: Originally Posted by millere6455 why can't the Hindu worker stay home and develop the Indian market Wow! it's just amazing, out of thin air, how India's GDP during the last year grew at greater than 7%. I suppose Indians are just plain lucky to achieve such higher growth rate without actually working hard towards it. Quote: Originally Posted by millere6455 without the need to come to the US and ruin somebody's life? I never knew I had so much in common with Irish immigrants of 1900s. Quote: Originally Posted by millere6455 Hard questions to answer, but should be easy for the obviously superior "Indian Hindu Brain"... I am not sure if I have a superior Hindu brain... but I am sure my brain is very different from Pedophile Prophet Muhammad brain and also a dead jewish person on a stick religion brain. #6 09-07-2004, 02:58 PM Paul Revere Registered User Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 532 Mario: You are new to this board (unless you are a reincarnation of some of our more memorable Indians of the past which I suspect may be true). It is well documented that India has piss poor IP protection. It is well documented that India encourges IP theft by specifically allowing it in their patent laws. It is well documented that India has tariff and non-tariff trade barriers that are mong the worlds highest. Yes, India is a thief. And India's day of reckoning is coming. Even George Bush is now talking about equity in trade relations. Frence and the EU have warned India about unfair trade practices. There will be no place for India to hide. Indis is not the center of the universe cantrary to what many Indians posting here believe. India can become one of the gruop of developed nations but India will not be allowed by the other nations to continue to practice largely one way trade. And BTW, Asians not caucasians tend to be the most successful academically. Asians include the Chinese which you so vigourously hate but do not include most Indians who are Aryan Caucasian. #7 09-07-2004, 04:35 PM Mario Registered User Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 10 Quote: Originally Posted by Paul Revere Mario: You are new to this board (unless you are a reincarnation of some of our more memorable Indians of the past which I suspect may be true). Does it come naturally to you to slander a person that you don't agree with ? Just how do you suspect that I am some kind of a liar who keeps changing my user name on this board ? Is it so hard for you and people of your type on this board to just debate the issues without calling somebody a liar, a thief, a Hindu ? I honestly pity the intelligence of a previous poster who actually brought religion in to the debate here. Quote: Originally Posted by Paul Revere It is well documented that India has piss poor IP protection. It is well documented that India encourges IP theft by specifically allowing it in their patent laws. May I give a bit of advice to you ? You should not talk about things THAT YOU HAVE NO IDEA ABOUT. Many people in India are buying personal laptops/computers these days. And guess what. MS Windows and all the assorted software comes pre-installed. The last time I checked, Windows OS and MS Office were totally designed, developed and tested in Redmond. Now don't start whining about how all the MS software is made in India these days. I have an immediate reference link that can debunk such ignorant argument coming from your types. Coming to the non-retail purchases, literally hundreds of thousands of offices ( both government and private ) run LEGAL copies of windows software. Yes... that's right. Contrary what you are thinking sitting in your chair thousands of miles away, ILLEGAL software is not used in offices in India. IP protection ? Please give examples of systematic IP theft happening in India. I challenge. Now don't give me examples of one odd case ( yeah I know about that case )..... show me examples of system wide pattern. Nobody here is claiming total perfection of IP protection in India. Now, do you want me to give outright examples of Bio Piracy by your beloved U.S companies ? Here...... http://www.mindfully.org/GE/Neem-Pa...voked-India.htm http://www.twnside.org.sg/title/revoked.htm http://www.american.edu/projects/ma...TED/basmati.htm Now what do you have to say about these thefts Mr. Revere ? I suppose it's OK if you are the biggest bully on the block... hah ? Quote: Originally Posted by Paul Revere It is well documented that India has tariff and non-tariff trade barriers that are mong the worlds highest. I agree with this point though. I am also glad to see Mr.President realizing the thievery of U.S steel sector and abolishing the U.S tariffs in that sector. Quote: Originally Posted by Paul Revere Asians include the Chinese which you so vigourously hate but do not include most Indians who are Aryan Caucasian. Why do you have to bring the race factor here ? Anyway... facts about china dumping Manufacturing goods sound like hate to you ? I read somewhere ..... Ostrich escapes danger by burying it's head under sand while leaving rest of it's body exposed. Wake up and just look around. That T.V remote you are flipping, the Microwave oven, the sofa set, the furniture in your home, the home accents in your home, that Wireless LAN router you are using, those numerous IC chips in various electronic items...... all are made in China. I suppose you are also OK with the Chinese stealing ( literally ) the rare metal magents technology from a plant in Indiana state and making them in China. Those magnets are now imported for use in various U.S. missile guidance systems. But what do you care ..... you don't want to miss out on being a Net Nazi posting hate mail on Indians while eating Chinese take-out food. #8 09-07-2004, 10:14 PM craphappens Registered User Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 409 I would safely ignore paul revere. he is just an anti-indian biggot who will keep going on and on with his rants about india. fact is nothing he says is going to happen. he just lives in a dream world. I have been away for some 6 months and after 6 months I came back and he is still on with the same stuff and nothing has changed. #9 09-08-2004, 04:24 AM The Elephant Registered User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Bangalor, India Posts: 44 Quote: Originally Posted by Mario Why do you have to bring the race factor here ? Anyway... facts about china dumping Manufacturing goods sound like hate to you ? I read somewhere ..... Ostrich escapes danger by burying it's head under sand while leaving rest of it's body exposed. Wake up and just look around. That T.V remote you are flipping, the Microwave oven, the sofa set, the furniture in your home, the home accents in your home, that Wireless LAN router you are using, those numerous IC chips in various electronic items...... all are made in China. I suppose you are also OK with the Chinese stealing ( literally ) the rare metal magents technology from a plant in Indiana state and making them in China. Those magnets are now imported for use in various U.S. missile guidance systems. But what do you care ..... you don't want to miss out on being a Net Nazi posting hate mail on Indians while eating Chinese take-out food. Mario, since u'r new to this forum and might not have possibly read every single post on this site, i would like to keep u informed that M.Paul Revere is indeed of Chinese origin. This fact had been established beyond doubt despite his vehement opposition to the idea. Bye __________________ Think Big-As u think , so u become! .........The Elephant #10 09-08-2004, 07:13 AM Stars Registered User Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 131 Quote: Originally Posted by millere6455 ..... why can't the Hindu worker stay home and develop the Indian market ....... If American products and services were to stay home, then American economy will be long dead..... #11 09-08-2004, 09:04 AM AmericanDesi Registered User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Central Time Posts: 287 Quote: Originally Posted by Stars If American products and services were to stay home, then American economy will be long dead..... What American products ? When posed the question, how will America benefit from increased trade with India, the only product pro-offshorers consistently come up with are increased purchases of Boeing's aircrafts and defence gear ! To make a spoof on an old popular Hindi song from India (from the movie Shri 420): Mera Joota Hai Japani Yeh Patloon Inglistani Sar Pe Lal Topi Roosi Phir Bhi Dil Hai Hindustani translated: My shoes are of Japanese make My trousers are from England The red hat on my head is Russian Yet my heart will remain Indian. In todays day and age, an American should probably sing: My shoes are Made in China My trousers are also Made in China Oh this red hat too is Chinese But our software, thats built in India. #12 09-08-2004, 09:16 AM Stars Registered User Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 131 Quote: Originally Posted by AmericanDesi .....When posed the question, how will America benefit from increased trade with India, the only product pro-offshorers consistently come up with are increased purchases of Boeing's aircrafts and defence gear ! Americans can sell in India in whichever market segment they can successfully compete with other companies. Almost anything, be it Pepsi, Coke, Potato chips, detergents, cars, computers, phones, telephone exchanges, consulting services, software packages of all types....Oh, the list is very long. The rules of engagement are the same for all countries. But the original advice from Mr. Millere6455 was for Indians to stay home and ignore American markets. That is against the principles of free markets that Americans championed not so long in the past. If Indians/Hindus were to stay at home, as Mr. Millere6455 suggests, so should American companies. And that certainly would not be good for America. Will it? Last edited by Stars : 09-08-2004 at 09:22 AM. #13 09-08-2004, 09:42 AM IndianNUSA Registered User Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 35 Racist Americans on this site The Americans on this site are outright racist and India haters. Seeing the India haters on this site, I have decided to buy as much non-american as possible, hire as many non americans as possible. These thugs had the audacity to advise Putin to talk to Chechens but they will carpet bomb children in Iraq. What a fitting response from Putin? #14 09-08-2004, 11:19 AM AmericanDesi Registered User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Central Time Posts: 287 Stars, While I do not agree with the tone of Miller's comments, I would like to point out that the Indian software and BPO industry have a very limited domestic market with the software sector accounting for less than 25% of the total revenues. 70% of the export revenue comes from the US ! It is precisely such opportunities and experience that has catapulted India as a force to reckon with in the global software marketplace. While, like you said, Americans can compete in any industry, the reality is that America has followed a policy of shifting production outside the country to the extent that it is losing whatever technological edge it had to other countries. Some argue that because it is losing its edge, American corps move production offshore. I argue that because it moves production offshore to simply save on costs while making no effort to improve production at home, America is playing a losing battle on prices ! In other words, American corporations are increasingly turning to easy fixes to compete in world markets than taking the tough road of utilizing local talent and building strong American brands ! Whatever technological edge this country had is being gifted away to foreign countries who owe NOTHING in terms of allegiance or even good will to the development of this country ! The Pepsi and Coke success stories that you cite, date back to several decades ago ! Then Americans prided in themselves, today we are saying that "we have a weak labour pool, we don't have talent, we have to import labor". I say, that's the biggest lie and fraud that's being sold on national TV to the masses. Further, that is the most pessimistic and defeatist argument our corporate and national leaders can make ! What's scary is that this is being lapped up by the media and domestic audiences ! Last edited by AmericanDesi : 09-08-2004 at 11:25 AM. #15 09-08-2004, 02:29 PM tarajill2001 Registered User Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: NYC Metro Area Posts: 399 Big Challenge, "mario" Quote: Originally Posted by mario IP protection ? Please give examples of systematic IP theft happening in India. I challenge. Now don't give me examples of one odd case ( yeah I know about that case )..... show me examples of system wide pattern. How about India's entire pharmaceutical industry? Pharma companies in the USA (or elsewhere) invest billions in research; some scientist at an Indian pharma company replicates it (legally because this is legal in India) ... and ... voila! ... instant successful drug with none of those annoying research and development costs! Kinda like the cheap labor BPO and IT situation ... invest nothing in infrastruture or try to build an economy or industries where you can stand ON YOUR OWN TWO FEET! Instead, rely on living off of other countries as THE INDUSTRY. Offer yourselves cheap and suck jobs up through the internet like a baby sucks on a bottle at feeding time! Yeah yeah yeah I know. There is a market that wants what you sell (MNCs, etc.)! But say there wasn't? Say you weren't cheap enough but were competent OR you were cheap but not competent enough? That wouldn't work, would it? BPO and offshored IT jobs are not an "industry" as you all continually crow. For all the braggarts, this is not an independent industry that can stand on its own. So braggarts and boasters think of yourselves as what you really are, indentured servants to MNCs FOR THE TIME BEING while your "cheapness:competency" ratio is ahead of the competition (only for the time being). __________________ "Aren't you glad I'm not bitter?" From rajlakshmi_nesargi at yahoo.com Thu Sep 16 13:17:14 2004 From: rajlakshmi_nesargi at yahoo.com (Rajlakshmi Nesargi) Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 00:47:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Commons-Law] Telecasting rights litigation Message-ID: <20040916074714.24733.qmail@web51606.mail.yahoo.com> Dear all, Could anyone provide me with the details on the ongoing litigation in the Mumbai High Court between Zee Telefilms and ESPN-Star please on the telecasting rights. The news clipping provides the details. Thank you Raji COURT STAYS AWARD OF TELECAST RIGHTS PRESS TRUST OF INDIA Mumbai, 15 September The Bombay High Court today asked the cricket board not to award a contract to any party for cricket telecast rights from October 2004 to September 2008 until it decides the legal dispute between Zee Telefilms Ltd and ESPN-Star Sports over the issue. As Zee Telefilm Lid informed the court that it did not agree to its suggestion for fresh bidding, Chief Justice Dalveer Bhandri and Justice Dhananjay Chandrachud decided to hear on merits the petition filed by ESPN- Star Sports challenging the Board of control for Cricket in India�s (BCCI�s) move to award contracts for telecast rights to Zee Telefilm Ltd for $308 million. Hearing the plea made by Zee Telefilm Ltd and ESPN-Star Sports, the judges asked BCCI to make a firm commitment of not awarding the contract to any party, but the Cricket board sought time for a few hours to consult its members. The BCCI expressed its inability to make such a commitment saying the Australian cricket team would visit India to play a four-test series commencing October 6 and in keeping with International Cricket Council (ICC) rules the series would have to be telecast otherwise there would be a breach of condition of affiliation with ICC. BCCI�s counsel submitted that the cricket matches have to be recorded for the benefit of the third umpire also. Earlier, BCCI had made a statement before the court that although Zee Telefilm Ltd had won the bid; the contract had not yet been awarded to it. In view of this statement, the court ordered the BCCI to maintain status quo over its decision and not to award a contract to anyone until the legal row between Zee Telefilm Ltd and ESPN-Star Sports was resolved. Both ESPN-Star Sports and Zee Telefilm today urged the court to ask BCCI to give a firm commitment of not giving the contract to any third party unless their legal dispute on bagging the four-years telecast rights of cricket matches was settled. Their counsel pointed out reports in a section of the media where in the BCCI president Jag Mohan Dalmiya had stated that in case the legal dispute between ESPN-Star Sport and Zee Telefilm drags on, the cricket board may consider giving the contract to Prasar Bharati for the benefit of third umpire. The judges said soon after they cleared pending cases, they would hear on merit arguments of both sides on the petition filed by ESPN-Star Sports Challenging BCCI�s decision to award the telecast rights to Zee telefilm Ltd. Zee Telefilm Ltd had yesterday filed an affidavit in the High Court saying their boards of directors were not agreeable to a suggestion put by the division bench for re-bidding. The Union government also filed an affidavit saying it had no role to play as BCCI was an autonomous body and hence award of telecast rights was solely with in its jurisdiction. The affidavit said promotion of sports, which figured in the �state list� of the constitution, was primarily the responsibility of the state governments and national sports federations. It said the central government only supplemented the efforts of the states and the national sports federations by providing financial assistance. Sports federations like BCCI are autonomous in their functioning and hence the award of telecast rights was solely within the jurisdiction of BCCI, the affidavit said. Opposing espn�s contention, the government affidavit said there was no question of withdrawal of recognition to BCCI as it had not come across any breach of conditions under which the sports federations were given recognition. Espn-STAR Sports contended that Zee Telefilm Ltd was not eligible, as it had violated a tender condition, which stipulated that only those entities, which have telecast experience of two years, could apply for the contract. Prasar Bharati ready to telecast next series OUR BUREAU & AGENCIES New Delhi/Kolkata, 15 September Even as Zee and ESPN-Star sports are slugging it out in court, Prasar Bharati today said it is fully prepared to telecast the upcoming India-Australia domestic series, which begins from October. �We have not received any official request from the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) on this matter, though one of its members has asked us to be prepared,� Prasar Bharati CEO K S Sarma. He said the public broadcaster was fully prepared and capable to telecast the series on its own. The working committee of the BCCI is meeting in Kolkata tomorrow to look for ways to make sure that television coverage for the forthcoming international matches India is not interrupted. In the meeting, BCCI will discuss the latest situation rising out of the legal dispute and suggest the next course of action in view of the Indo-Australia test and one-day series from October. The first test will start from October 6,but BCCI is now in a quandary to make sure it is telecasted as per the norms of the International Cricket Council (ICC), the cricket regulator of the world. BCCI�s contract with Doordarshan on telecasting domestic international matches will come to an end this month while the new series gets underway next month. Sources said BCCI could make a short-term arrangement by offering state run doordarshan live telecast of the Australia Series, given the fact that the Zee-ESPN Star Sports legal battle might not be resolved easily. _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From dev.gangjee at st-catherines.oxford.ac.uk Thu Sep 16 13:36:12 2004 From: dev.gangjee at st-catherines.oxford.ac.uk (Dev Gangjee) Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 09:06:12 +0100 (BST) Subject: [Commons-Law] patents for observable problems In-Reply-To: <20040916063006.1DD2428E81D@mail.sarai.net> Message-ID: <20040916080612.BAE7E131DA@webmail221.herald.ox.ac.uk> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/commons-law/attachments/20040916/0621aab3/attachment.pl From shamnadbasheer at yahoo.co.in Fri Sep 17 17:26:22 2004 From: shamnadbasheer at yahoo.co.in (Shamnad Basheer) Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 12:56:22 +0100 (BST) Subject: [Commons-Law] patents for observable problems In-Reply-To: <20040916080612.BAE7E131DA@webmail221.herald.ox.ac.uk> Message-ID: <20040917115622.2172.qmail@web8407.mail.in.yahoo.com> Dear Mrinalini, You're quite right that the "discovery" hurdle would prevent the patenting of the scientific principle itself. However, in the specific example that you cite, the assumption that Z may be eligible for a patent on the method for keeping knees warm may be a misplaced one. Dev hints at this when he speaks of the issue of "obviousness". In the light of prior art (X finding that stiff knees go stiffer in winter and Y recommending that stiff knees should therefore be kept warm in winter), Z's water bag solution may amount to a rather "obvious" solution. I guess in this case, you dont even have to go as far as a "person skilled in the art"-even a layman would tell you this. Even if Z's method were to be a "non-obvious" one, it could, as Dev rightly suggests, be precluded from patentability owing to the bar on patenting a 'method of medical treatment'. I hope this helps. Regards-Shamnad --- Dev Gangjee wrote: > Dear Mrinalini > > Most patent systems would respond to such a query > through the following stages - > > 1. A patent is only given for an invention and not a > discovery, so merely an observed phenomenon may not > qualify, but as you've suggested the response to it > (such as the hot water bags remedy) may qualify for > a process patent. > > 2. If it is an invention, then the 3 key > requirements that have to be satisfied > are novelty, utility (or industrial application) & > non-obviousness. > Assuming both novelty & utility, the process > suggested as a response must also > not be an obvious response to the observed > phenomenon. The perspective for judging whether this > is obvious or not is that of a person 'skilled in > the art'. > > 3. Finally, the most interesting part of your query > is whether the very idea of keeping knees warm is > patentable as a remedy. [Many jurisdictions do not > permit medical method patents and such a process > patent might fall into that category, but we'll > ignore it for the time being]. > This brings us to one of the most controversial > areas in patent law - that of > patent claims specifications. > The document submitted to the Patent Office must > itemize what the scope of the patents is going to be > through a series of claims about what it does. > Administrative bodies and courts are then faced with > a dilemma - > (a) In a dispute, should they interpret the claims > narrowly and limit the patent to literally what is > claimed in the specification? This could lead to > injustice to the patentee as a competitor could file > a patent with only cosmetic differences in claims > and get away with it; or > (b) Interpret the claims purposively (what is > referred to as the Doctrine of Equivalents in the > US) to cover equivalent claims i.e. an area which > the patentee must have intended to cover, when she > was filing for the patent. > The problem with this is that it gives the patent > owner a fairly broad monopoly and tends towards > protecting ideas themselves. > [In fact this is always flagged as one of the big > differences between patents > and copyright - the former allows ideas to be > protected while the latter protects only expressions > of ideas and not the ideas themselves] > > Might not be a happy answer for a pro-public domain > list, but hope that's of some clarificatory use :) > > Dev > > > 1. Patents for observed problems? (Mrinalini > Kochupillai) > > > I came across an interesting query from a > scientist last week - can an > > observed phenomenon - say - the fact that stiff > knees get stiffer in > > winter and ought threfore be given warmth - be > patented? Can parts of > > it be patented? Say - if X were to realise that > stiff knees go stiffer > > in winter, Y were to give the solution that stiff > knees should > > therefore be kept warm in winter and later Z were > to come up with a > > method - that stiff knees can be kept warm in > winter using hot water > > bags, then would Z get a patent (a) only over the > process/method of > > keeping knees warm, or (b) would he also get a > patent over the > > underlying idea that stiff knees ought to be kept > warm in winter? > > > > I would think that a logical conclusion > (problem)derived from an > > observed phenomena would not merit a patent > protection - a method of > > overcoming the problem alone would get protection > - simply becasue > > ideas cant be protected. Thus, if some one were to > come up with a new > > means of keeping the knee warm in winters, he > would not be infringing > > Z's patent. - Am I right in so thinking? > > > > Best Wishes > > > > Mrinalini > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > commons-law mailing list > > commons-law at sarai.net > > > https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/commons-law > > > > > > End of commons-law Digest, Vol 14, Issue 14 > > ******************************************* > > > _______________________________________________ > commons-law mailing list > commons-law at sarai.net > https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/commons-law > ________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your life partner online Go to: http://yahoo.shaadi.com/india-matrimony From Vaibhav at AnandAndAnand.com Fri Sep 17 19:57:14 2004 From: Vaibhav at AnandAndAnand.com (Vaibhav Vutts) Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 19:57:14 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Infringementof patents Message-ID: Could someone help me with a simple question pertaining to patents-say for example there are two unrelated entities A and B, wherein A is the manufacturer of a machine and B sells these machines after labeling/ branding it. In due course of time B receives a notice that he is infringing a patent of a C. Now my question is - a) would B be liable for the patent infringement as he has absolutely no links with A except that of whole sale buying and retailing the same b) What if A is branding the machines and B is wholesaler of these branded machines and retailing them further c) In both the above situation is the onus on B to show that he has not infringed d) Lastly as a matter of caution what can B do so that in future he avoids a similar situation. Regards Vaibhav Vaibhav Vutts Anand & Anand K-47, Kailash Colony New Delhi - 110 048 Phones: +91-11-51635900-7 Fax: +91-11-51635908 - 9 __________________________________________________ Information contained in this mail is confidential and proprietary. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, then please note that any review, copying, or dissemination of the information contained herein is strictly prohibited. Further, we request you to notify us immediately by return email and delete all copies of this communication those are in your possession -----Original Message----- From: Shamnad Basheer [mailto:shamnadbasheer at yahoo.co.in] Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 5:26 PM To: commons-law at sarai.net Subject: Re: [Commons-Law] patents for observable problems Dear Mrinalini, You're quite right that the "discovery" hurdle would prevent the patenting of the scientific principle itself. However, in the specific example that you cite, the assumption that Z may be eligible for a patent on the method for keeping knees warm may be a misplaced one. Dev hints at this when he speaks of the issue of "obviousness". In the light of prior art (X finding that stiff knees go stiffer in winter and Y recommending that stiff knees should therefore be kept warm in winter), Z's water bag solution may amount to a rather "obvious" solution. I guess in this case, you dont even have to go as far as a "person skilled in the art"-even a layman would tell you this. Even if Z's method were to be a "non-obvious" one, it could, as Dev rightly suggests, be precluded from patentability owing to the bar on patenting a 'method of medical treatment'. I hope this helps. Regards-Shamnad --- Dev Gangjee wrote: > Dear Mrinalini > > Most patent systems would respond to such a query > through the following stages - > > 1. A patent is only given for an invention and not a > discovery, so merely an observed phenomenon may not > qualify, but as you've suggested the response to it > (such as the hot water bags remedy) may qualify for > a process patent. > > 2. If it is an invention, then the 3 key > requirements that have to be satisfied > are novelty, utility (or industrial application) & > non-obviousness. > Assuming both novelty & utility, the process > suggested as a response must also > not be an obvious response to the observed > phenomenon. The perspective for judging whether this > is obvious or not is that of a person 'skilled in > the art'. > > 3. Finally, the most interesting part of your query > is whether the very idea of keeping knees warm is > patentable as a remedy. [Many jurisdictions do not > permit medical method patents and such a process > patent might fall into that category, but we'll > ignore it for the time being]. > This brings us to one of the most controversial > areas in patent law - that of > patent claims specifications. > The document submitted to the Patent Office must > itemize what the scope of the patents is going to be > through a series of claims about what it does. > Administrative bodies and courts are then faced with > a dilemma - > (a) In a dispute, should they interpret the claims > narrowly and limit the patent to literally what is > claimed in the specification? This could lead to > injustice to the patentee as a competitor could file > a patent with only cosmetic differences in claims > and get away with it; or > (b) Interpret the claims purposively (what is > referred to as the Doctrine of Equivalents in the > US) to cover equivalent claims i.e. an area which > the patentee must have intended to cover, when she > was filing for the patent. > The problem with this is that it gives the patent > owner a fairly broad monopoly and tends towards > protecting ideas themselves. > [In fact this is always flagged as one of the big > differences between patents > and copyright - the former allows ideas to be > protected while the latter protects only expressions > of ideas and not the ideas themselves] > > Might not be a happy answer for a pro-public domain > list, but hope that's of some clarificatory use :) > > Dev > > > 1. Patents for observed problems? (Mrinalini > Kochupillai) > > > I came across an interesting query from a > scientist last week - can an > > observed phenomenon - say - the fact that stiff > knees get stiffer in > > winter and ought threfore be given warmth - be > patented? Can parts of > > it be patented? Say - if X were to realise that > stiff knees go stiffer > > in winter, Y were to give the solution that stiff > knees should > > therefore be kept warm in winter and later Z were > to come up with a > > method - that stiff knees can be kept warm in > winter using hot water > > bags, then would Z get a patent (a) only over the > process/method of > > keeping knees warm, or (b) would he also get a > patent over the > > underlying idea that stiff knees ought to be kept > warm in winter? > > > > I would think that a logical conclusion > (problem)derived from an > > observed phenomena would not merit a patent > protection - a method of > > overcoming the problem alone would get protection > - simply becasue > > ideas cant be protected. Thus, if some one were to > come up with a new > > means of keeping the knee warm in winters, he > would not be infringing > > Z's patent. - Am I right in so thinking? > > > > Best Wishes > > > > Mrinalini > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > commons-law mailing list > > commons-law at sarai.net > > > https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/commons-law > > > > > > End of commons-law Digest, Vol 14, Issue 14 > > ******************************************* > > > _______________________________________________ > commons-law mailing list > commons-law at sarai.net > https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/commons-law > ________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your life partner online Go to: http://yahoo.shaadi.com/india-matrimony _______________________________________________ commons-law mailing list commons-law at sarai.net https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/commons-law From shekhar at crit.org.in Sat Sep 18 11:07:06 2004 From: shekhar at crit.org.in (Shekhar Krishnan) Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2004 11:07:06 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] eForum on OPEN ACCESS to Scholarly Publications: A model for enhanced knowledge management? Message-ID: From: mailto:vikas.nath at undp.org Vikas Nath To: mailto:murari at darya.nio.org murari at darya.nio.org Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 7:54 PM Subject: Invitation- eForum on "OPEN ACCESS to Scholarly Publications: A model for enhanced knowledge management?" We invite you to participate in the upcoming eForum on "OPEN ACCESS TO SCHOLARLY PUBLICATIONS: A MODEL FOR ENHANCED KNOWLEDGE MANGEMENT?" hosted by the global public goods Network (gpgNet). http://www.gpgnet.net/topic08.php http://www.gpgnet.net/topic08.php The eForum will run from 20 September through 4 October 2004. To subscribe to this forum, send a blank email to: mailto:subscribe-gpgnet-oa at groups.undp.org subscribe-gpgnet-oa at groups.undp.org   or, go to: http://groups.undp.org/read/all_forums/subscribe?name=gpgnet-oa http://groups.undp.org/read/all_forums/subscribe?name=gpgnet-oa There exists a rapidly expanding stock of scientific knowledge. Yet, access to this pool of knowledge is often difficult. A primary reason for this is the relatively high price of scholarly journals, their printed and their web-based versions. This situation, it can be argued is both inequitable and inefficient. Initiatives have been undertaken to demonstrate that scientific knowledge need not necessarily be published in forms that make access expensive - or even impossible. It could be provided free of charge - through open access to it - without detrimental effect on scientific knowledge production and preserving the peer-review process that is key to validate scientific results. With open access, fees to meet the publishing costs - when required - are paid up front when articles are accepted by a journal, rather than by the readers. Access to the journal is then provided for free. Today, about 5% of academic publishing follows the open-access model. But the model is quickly gaining ground, including among both for-profit (BioMedCentral -BMC) and not-for-profit (Public Library of Science PloS) publishers. We can also deliver open access through archives or repositories.  OA repositories do not perform peer review, but can host and disseminate works that have been peer-reviewed elsewhere. They are built on open-source software and are very inexpensive to launch and maintain. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The key points suggested for the debate are: 1. What are the main pros and cons of open-access scholarly publishing? 2. Thinking in particular of scholars in developing countries (and the fact that research grants may not be as easily available for them than for industrial-country scholars), could they face a new disadvantage? What sources will be available to pay these fees when authors cannot get their funder or employer to pay them? Will all open-access journals be able to waive processing fees in cases of economic hardship, as PLoS and BMC do? Should the international aid community maintain a fund/facility to help meet these costs? 3. Is the open-access model of publishing more likely to be successful in some than in other fields? What would determine the likely success? 4. Could the open-access model of knowledge management be applied beyond scholarly academic publishing? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To aid debate on the topic, read a detailed overview of how open access to scholarly publications works by Peter Suber, Open Access Project Director at Public Knowledge, Washington, D.C, available at http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/overview.htm http://www.earlham.edu/%7Epeters/fos/overview.htm Also read how the Budapest Open Access Initiative defines "Open Access" at http://www.soros.org/openaccess Join  us for this debate and share with us - and the global public - your observations on this topic. Inge Kaul Director, Office of Development Studies Vikas Nath Manager, Global Public Goods Network (gpgNet) Forum United Nations Development Programme 336 East 45 Street New York NY 10017 USA Email: info at gpgnet.net URL: http://www.gpgnet.net/ http://www.gpgNet.net --- gpgNet.net intends to serve researchers, policymakers, business and civil society as a platform for information exchange and discussion on issues concerning the theory, policy design and practice of providing global public goods. 20 September- 4 October 2004: gpgNet Forum on "Open Access to Scholarly Publications: A Model for Enhanced Knowledge Management?" Subscribe to this forum by sending a blank email to: mailto:subscribe-gpgnet-oa at groups.undp.org subscribe-gpgnet-oa at groups.undp.org  or going to: http://groups.undp.org/read/all_forums/subscribe?name=gpgnet-oa http://groups.undp.org/read/all_forums/subscribe?name=gpgnet-oa Read background paper to the discussion at http://www.gpgnet.net/topic08.php http://www.gpgnet.net/topic08.php    _____ Shekhar Krishnan c/o George Jose and Surabhi Sharma 260, 6th C Main Road HMT Layout R.T. Nagar, Bangalore 560032 India From prashant at wannabelawyer.com Sun Sep 19 13:36:21 2004 From: prashant at wannabelawyer.com (Prashant Iyengar) Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 13:36:21 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Fw: IS this blackmail by a devoloper? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200409191336.21564.prashant@wannabelawyer.com> Dear all, This may be of interest to some of you. It's a software that messages its developer if anyone hacks its code. Regards, Prashant All 4 messages - view as tree Usenet text Sep 18, 11:11 am The software is email2pop.. Couldn't everyone do this? What is the name of your state? PA A software developer has a piece of software that, if hacked, will report your personal information to the developer. The developer then send you an email asking for a "settlement" to avoid criminal charges. Isn't this basically: "I have something on you.. Pay me and I won't tell" I found a defintion for black mail as: Any payment obtained by intimidation, threats of injurious revelations or accusations. The extortion of this payment. A general term covering a number of statutory offences involving obtaining money and other property by using threats of violence, threats to accuse of a crime, or other menacing conduct. Making an unwarranted demand with menaces with a view to gain or to cause a loss, for example, threatening to publish embarrassing material unless something is done in return, such as money or favours. The details are here from their email.. What PorkChup Solutions will do with your information - Because you have potentially violated federal copyright and civil laws, PorkChup Solutions has the right to take you to trial seeking monetary penalties and jail time. PorkChup Solutions can obtain additional information about you, including personal billing information from your Internet Service Provider. With evidence provided by your ISP and the sensitive identifying information collected by eMail2Pop, PorkChup Solutions has enough information to quickly bring you to justice through international and domestic courts. We do not want to initiate legal action - It is in PorkChup Solutions' best interest to spend the least amount of resources possible in persuing piracy. We support the piracy education program where companies raise awareness on the severity of software piracy and the damage it does to the economy. Therefore, our goal is only to teach you a lesson and not take legal action against you. To clear your name from prosecution, PorkChup Solutions offers a way for you to pay for your copy of eMail2Pop along with a minimal settlement fee. The settlement fee is $80, which includes a legal license to use eMail2Pop for one year. Your name will also be removed from the database within six months. As part of the settlement, you agree not to knowingly use illegal software in the future. Should any of these conditions be violated, the settlement can be nullified at our discretion without refund, and legal prosecution may occur. 4Reply Details: Show quoted text | View source | Unwrap Lines | Forward Barry Margolin Sep 18, 5:20 pm show options New! From: Barry Margolin Date:Sat, 18 Sep 2004 20:20:12 -0400 Local: Sat, Sep 18 2004 5:20 pm Subject: Re: IS this blackmail by a devoloper? Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Show original In article , "Usenet text" wrote: > The software is email2pop.. Couldn't everyone do this? > What is the name of your state? PA > A software developer has a piece of software that, if hacked, will report Hacked? It looks like they're just going after people who are using the software without licensing it legally. > your personal information to the developer. The developer then send you an > email asking for a "settlement" to avoid criminal charges. Isn't this > basically: "I have something on you.. Pay me and I won't tell" How does the $80 "settlement fee" compare to the purchase price of the software? And what about the legal fees that you would have to spend to defend yourself against charges of copyright violation? -- Barry Margolin, bar... at alum.mit.edu Arlington, MA 4Reply Details: Show quoted text | View source | Unwrap Lines | Forward Isaac Sep 18, 5:44 pm show options New! From: Isaac Date:Sat, 18 Sep 2004 19:44:34 -0500 Local: Sat, Sep 18 2004 5:44 pm Subject: Re: IS this blackmail by a devoloper? Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Show From jace at pobox.com Mon Sep 20 09:13:26 2004 From: jace at pobox.com (Kiran Jonnalagadda) Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 09:13:26 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Fw: IS this blackmail by a devoloper? In-Reply-To: <200409191336.21564.prashant@wannabelawyer.com> References: <200409191336.21564.prashant@wannabelawyer.com> Message-ID: <3AEAF596-0AB7-11D9-8E50-000A95684A18@pobox.com> On Sep 19, 2004, at 1:36 PM, Prashant Iyengar wrote: > Dear all, > This may be of interest to some of you. It's a software that messages > its > developer if anyone hacks its code. Two other examples: Mac: http://www.unsanity.org/archives/000361.php Symbian: http://www.symbian.com/press-office/2004/pr040810.html On the latter, it's worth noting that while Symbian keeps harping about their "Symbian Signed" program to authenticate developers, I'm yet to see a *single* third-party Symbian app that came signed. Symbian Signed is basically Symbian's alibi for shrugging off responsibility. -- Kiran Jonnalagadda http://www.pobox.com/~jace From sudhir at circuit.sarai.net Mon Sep 20 11:19:15 2004 From: sudhir at circuit.sarai.net (sudhir at circuit.sarai.net) Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 11:19:15 +0530 (IST) Subject: [Commons-Law] IJCLP Call for Editors Message-ID: <2982.202.142.94.114.1095659355.squirrel@202.142.94.114> IJCLP News: 14/09/2004 ------------------------------------------------------------ International Communications Law and Policy - ISSN 1617-8319 Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Archive: http://www.tkr-newsletter.de/ No. of Subscribers Today: 2.715 ------------------------------------------------------------ INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COMMUNICATIONS LAW AND POLICY http://www.ijclp.org/ ============================ IJCLP IS RECRUITING COPY EDITOR AND THREE NEW EDITORS ============================ 1) The International Journal of Communications Law & Policy (IJCLP) is seeking motivated individuals to help edit articles for publication. Copy editors will work closely with a senior editor to polish submissions and ready them for publication. Editors will receive masthead credit on pieces on which they work. The IJCLP is a peer-reviewed law journal devoted to the changing law, policy and technology of media regulation around the world. Previous volumes have dealt with e-government, Internet regulation, cybercrime, privacy, and comparative examinations of national telecommunications regulation regimes, among other topics. The IJCLP is a semi-annual publication, publishing both online and in print. The journal also co-sponsors (with the Information Society Project) an annual conference at the Yale Law School. The IJCLP offers a unique opportunity for law students to work with researchers and practitioners from around the world on cutting-edge scholarship. Candidates should have strong writing skills, have an eye for detail, and work well without micro-management. Some experience with the Bluebook is recommended. Interested students should submit a short statement of interest and a C.V. in Word, WordPerfect, or PDF format, to Simone Bonetti (simo.bonetti at tiscali.it) & Boris Rotenberg (boris_rotenberg at yahoo.it). 2) The International Journal of Communications Law and Policy (IJCLP) is expanding its activities and is also looking to recruit three new editors, with immediate effect. The ideal candidate is an academic scholar with a strong background in (network) economics, political science, computer science, communications and information management studies, or cultural theory, having an interest in communications law. All things being equal, preference will be given to candidates from jurisdictions not yet represented on the IJCLP board. Successful candidates will become part of an international team and network of young scholars in communications law and Internet studies. The editorial board's main task is the on-line publication of semi-annual issues on international communications law, and the organization of writing competitions in conjunction with international conferences on related topics. Applications should be sent to Simone Bonetti & Boris Rotenberg. These should include a brief resume or CV, and a 500 word cover letter explaining the applicant's suitability for this appointment. For more information on IJCLP, please visit our site (www.ijclp.org), or contact Simone Bonetti (simo.bonetti at tiscali.it) & Boris Rotenberg (boris_rotenberg at yahoo.it). 3) see also: CALL FOR PAPERS ISSUE 9: deadline 1st January 2005 From dev.gangjee at st-catherines.oxford.ac.uk Mon Sep 20 19:27:53 2004 From: dev.gangjee at st-catherines.oxford.ac.uk (Dev Gangjee) Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 14:57:53 +0100 (BST) Subject: [Commons-Law] Further contact details on the TM PhD In-Reply-To: <20040918063007.8974028E1C4@mail.sarai.net> Message-ID: <20040920135753.61EDB2DE1B@webmail217.herald.ox.ac.uk> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/commons-law/attachments/20040920/e6a3609d/attachment.pl From rajlakshmi_nesargi at yahoo.com Tue Sep 21 11:16:56 2004 From: rajlakshmi_nesargi at yahoo.com (Rajlakshmi Nesargi) Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 22:46:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Commons-Law] microsoft2003 an open source access Message-ID: <20040921054656.76134.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> hmm...interesting strategy....but wonder why the access is allowed only to the government and the international organisations... Microsoft to provide Office source code to governments The U.K. government has already signed up to see the code News Story by Scarlet Pruitt SEPTEMBER 20, 2004 (IDG NEWS SERVICE) - Faced with growing competition from open-source software providers, Microsoft Corp. has decided to allow governments and international organizations access to source code for its Office 2003 productivity suite. The company said yesterday that it would be offering governments access to the Office code under a shared-source license as part of its Government Security Program. The U.K. government has already signed up to see the code, Microsoft said. The move is aimed at shoring up confidence in the security and interoperability of Microsoft software as it faces stiffer competition in the public sector from rivals such as Sun Microsystems Inc., which has been touting growing support among governments for its open-source productivity software, StarOffice. In addition to responding to open-source threats, Microsoft is also hoping that by allowing governments to lift the lid on Office, it can diminish mounting security concerns raised about its software. Microsoft has long offered governments access to source code for its Windows desktop software, but it has recently made gestures to disclose even more about its products. Last year, the company began allowing governments access to Office 2003 XML reference schemas, enabling them to incorporate the schemas into their own software to improve the interoperability with Office documents. Under the new shared-source license for Office, Microsoft said it would give governments related technical information and allow program participants to discuss projects related to the software. In addition to offering more shared-source licenses, the company has also sent signals that it would be willing to cooperate more with rivals. Under a litigation cease-fire deal reached with Sun earlier this year, Microsoft said it would look for more ways to work with developers of the Open Office open-source project, although it apparently reserved the right to sue them for patent infringement. Microsoft's expansive offers appear to be geared toward keeping a firm grip on the public sector, which often awards the largest software contracts in any country. The software maker said that more than 30 countries have already signed onto its Government Security Program and that it has already won an adherent to the new Office shared-source license in the British government. A U.K. government spokesman said in a statement that the Office 2003 shared-source license would help it understand the security implications of Office, allowing it to deploy the software more securely in a variety of scenarios. That Microsoft has signed up the U.K. government as one of the first program participants comes as little surprise, given their historically close relationship. The U.K. Office of Government Commerce (OGC), which negotiates volume deals for the public sector, signed a three-year licensing deal with Microsoft in 2002 to provide desktop software for almost 500,000 public servants. Furthermore, the government is putting final touches on a deal to renew the agreement, which an OGC spokesman characterized today as "imminent." Microsoft released news of the Office licensing program from Europe, underscoring the importance it places on winning big government deals in the region. Government bodies in Germany, Hungary, France and Italy have all recently thrown support behind open-source initiatives, putting pressure on Microsoft to work harder at winning public-sector contracts in Europe. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From jace at pobox.com Tue Sep 21 12:52:11 2004 From: jace at pobox.com (Kiran Jonnalagadda) Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 12:52:11 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] microsoft2003 an open source access In-Reply-To: <20040921054656.76134.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040921054656.76134.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Sep 21, 2004, at 11:16 AM, Rajlakshmi Nesargi wrote: > hmm...interesting strategy....but wonder why the > access is allowed only to the government and the > international organisations... > > Microsoft to provide Office source code to governments > The U.K. government has already signed up to see the > code Seems like a PR strategy. Governments as is are perpetually short of funds. They're unlikely to be able to afford skilled auditors to analyse a codebase as large as Office's. I suspect the way this works is, Microsoft will fund the audit for one major government, then tell the rest: "since you can't afford to check the code yourself, why not just depend on that other government's report?" Indians already do this with things like FCC and CE ratings on electronics. -- Kiran Jonnalagadda http://www.pobox.com/~jace From rajlakshmi_nesargi at yahoo.com Tue Sep 21 16:19:45 2004 From: rajlakshmi_nesargi at yahoo.com (Rajlakshmi Nesargi) Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 03:49:45 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Commons-Law] update on telecast rights Message-ID: <20040921104945.59954.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> Hi folks, An update on the ongoing litigation in Bombay Highcourt. As usual the pressure tactics.... Best Raji Australia says it may not play with TV blackout OUR CORPORATE BUREAU Mumbai, September 20 The Australian cricket Board has threatened to call off the forthcoming tour to India if the telecast row is not settled. No telecast, no tour, Cricket Australia (CA), the Australian Cricket Board, has told the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI). The Indo-Australian four-test series starting October 6, 2004, is the first game covered under the four-year telecast rights currently in dispute and being fought in the Bombay High Court. BCCI President Jag Mohan Dalmia confirmed the receipt of a letter from the Australian Cricket Board, but refused to divulge details. Talking to Business Standard from Kolkata over telephone, he said, �The letter has been submitted to the Bombay High Court where the case is pending.� The Bombay High Court has been hearing the petition filed by ESPN-Star Sports Challenging the BCCI�s decision to award the telecast rights to Zee Telefilms for $308 million. Sources close to the development said Cricket Australia (CA) has threatened to pull out of the four-Test series against India next month if the matches were not telecast. They added the CA has asked BCCI to inform the status of the telecast at least a fortnight before the series is slated to begin. Going by the time frame being laid by CA, the BCCI should inform its Australian counter part about the status of the telecast rights latest by tomorrow (Tuesday). The first test is slated to begin at Bangalore on October 6. Meanwhile, the Indian Cricket board today told the Bombay High Court that is has powers to cancel the tender process as well as call for a fresh bid for telecast of cricket matches and indicated that it may do so in case the legal row between ESPN-Star Sports and Zee Telefilms Ltd is not resolved soon. The statement was made by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) counsel KK Venugopal, who said the matter needs to be resolved speedily as ACB has threatened to with draw from the upcoming cricket matches in case the telecast does not take place. The BCCI counsel passed on the message of the ACB and urged the Court that the matter to be resolved expeditiously. However, there is a possibility that even if the court comes out with an early ruling, it will be challenged in higher courts. The counsel also said to the court that the BCCI has powers to cancel the tender process as well as call for a fresh bid for telecast of cricket matches, indicating that the board might go for fresh bid, if needed. The BCCI counsel said the clause 3.2, which deals with the eligibility in terms of experience and production capacity, may be done away with and the new tender would just focus on the highest bid. Sources said the CA�s demand for telecast coverage holds ground under the International Cricket Council (ICC) conditions, which make it clear that matches cannot be played without television coverage being made available to the third umpire. They added that the BCCI knew that the issue of telecast rights was a must and therefore began negotiations with another network. The BCCI move was stymied by a court ruling, which precluded it form doing another deal until the main matter was resolved. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? vote.yahoo.com - Register online to vote today! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/commons-law/attachments/20040921/651dd636/attachment.html From karim at sarai.net Tue Sep 21 16:28:20 2004 From: karim at sarai.net (Aniruddha Shankar) Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 16:28:20 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] microsoft2003 an open source access In-Reply-To: <20040921054656.76134.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040921054656.76134.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4150094C.7060009@sarai.net> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Rajlakshmi Nesargi wrote: | Microsoft to provide Office source code to governments | The U.K. government has already signed up to see the | code there's been some discussion about this in techie circles and one of the major concerns that has been expressed is the fear that any government-contracted programmer who sees the code will become "tainted" in that s/he will no longer be able to contribute to or work for projects like OpenOffice.org or KDE Office or Gnome Abiword without throwing open the door for Microsoft to prosecute the respective projects for unauthorised copying of code / processes. http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=122425&threshold=0&commentsort=0&tid=109&tid=172&tid=201&tid=218&mode=thread&cid=10296299 Also, apprehension has been expressed about governments spending taxpayer money finding & fixing bugs for Microsoft and those contributions becoming part of MS intellectual property. ah well http://www.openoffice.org http://www.scribus.org http://www.inkscape.org cheers, - -- Aniruddha 'Karim' Shankar The Sarai Programme Key ID: 0xA037AD2B Public Key Fingerprint: 9167 C0E7 A679 0906 7E47 83C0 8499 2B77 A037 AD2B To get my public key, search http://pgp.mit.edu for my email id. To directly import my key into your keyring, run gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys A037AD2B . -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFBUAlLhJkrd6A3rSsRAohRAJ4oAkCbbinsssqG8ef4LCOGONI3LACfSzY1 Vlu5n0ePmb0GYFzL42zmgUc= =v0BK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From annymcbeal at rediffmail.com Thu Sep 16 19:31:25 2004 From: annymcbeal at rediffmail.com (anuranjan s) Date: 16 Sep 2004 14:01:25 -0000 Subject: [Commons-Law] twins of patent! Message-ID: <20040916140125.22587.qmail@webmail36.rediffmail.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/commons-law/attachments/20040916/d7e0dd88/attachment.html -------------- next part --------------   Hi everyone, This is my final publication draft for SARAI-ALF fellowship, do send your comments. Anuranjan p.s. if u find any problems opening the document please tell me. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TWINS_1_.doc Type: application/msword Size: 76288 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/commons-law/attachments/20040916/d7e0dd88/attachment.doc From annymcbeal at rediffmail.com Tue Sep 21 00:57:26 2004 From: annymcbeal at rediffmail.com (anuranjan s) Date: 20 Sep 2004 19:27:26 -0000 Subject: [Commons-Law] twins of patent system Message-ID: <20040920192726.31555.qmail@webmail45.rediffmail.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/commons-law/attachments/20040920/01746c02/attachment.html -------------- next part --------------   Hi everyone, I am posting my final publication paper (written for ALF-SARAI fellowship) here on the commons list for your consideration. Please comment. Anuranjan -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TWINS.rtf Type: application/rtf Size: 63342 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/commons-law/attachments/20040920/01746c02/attachment.rtf From annymcbeal at rediffmail.com Tue Sep 21 12:57:27 2004 From: annymcbeal at rediffmail.com (anuranjan s) Date: 21 Sep 2004 07:27:27 -0000 Subject: [Commons-Law] twins of patent Message-ID: <20040921072727.24609.qmail@webmail36.rediffmail.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/commons-law/attachments/20040921/95095362/attachment.html -------------- next part --------------  Hi all, This is my final publication draft (for ALF-SARAI fellowship) I am posting here for your consideration, please comment. ‘The Twins’ of Patent System The rationale for the existence of a patent system is found in various theories of patent law that have developed over last 3 centuries . These theories can be broadly divided under two heads those justifying a patent as a system of rewards, benefits of which accrue to any person who brings to life a new and useful invention. Locke’s labour theory of property is an example of this school of thought . Essentially these theorists argue that, there isn’t just enough incentive for a person to invest his “intellectual labour” into creating an invention and that a system of intellectual property ensures the availability of such incentive . This argument is especially true in cases of a patent system that protects inventions that are a product of intellectual input without which such inventions don’t take place . The other school of thought is much more recent and broadly falls within the discipline of “law and economics” . This school mainly propounds what is called the ‘economic justifications’ of a patent system. Intellectual property is a public good and hence has the properties of ‘non-rivalrousness’ and ‘non-exhaustibility’ and the same is true for ‘invention’, which is an intellectual property. Proponents of this school argue that, public good nature of ‘inventions’ puts to threat the huge investments that are necessary to develop modern technological inventions. With the fast paced developments in technologies of copying and reverse-engineering of all old and new forms of technological inventions these investments are at great risk, especially in the high-cost consumption industries like, chemical, software and biotechnology industry. Hence a system of intellectual property is necessary to protect these huge investments that go into the process of creating modern technological inventions, which ensures that all investments are recouped with a monopoly system of protection in place before further investments is risked. Richard Posner and Robert P. Merges are the proponents of this school . Wherein, the first school defines the monopoly system of patent and copyright that gives shape to what is today known as the modern Intellectual property system, latter draws its justifications from this pre-existing structure. Though none of these schools claim distinctiveness, exclusivity or supremacy in their justifications for patent system yet the researcher submits these two schools offer two distinct genres of justifications which create multiple interest holders in patent system, whose interests may come into conflict in the contemporary practice of inventing and patenting. This paper begins by looking at the various historical and social factors that led to this plurality of interests in the patent system. Reliance is placed primarily on accounts provided by various scholars of the changes that took place at the turn of 19th century, which led to the development of ‘invention factories’, and how these changes affected the judicial perception of the protection granted by the intellectual property system. It may be wrong to suppose that that the plurality of interests within patent doctrine necessarily indicates a conflict between them but it would also be audacious to treat these two to be harmoniously operating within modern practice of patenting. These interests are represented by different subjects of patent law belonging to different classes; who form distinct relations with the invention and perceive patent as a legal tool for two very different purposes. This division then leads to a conflict within patent law wherein different stakeholders claim primacy. What could be the cause of this conflict of interest within patent doctrine? What effect does this conflict have upon the ultimate purpose of patent law, supposing there is one single purpose? The existing legal scholarship doesn’t offer any answers to these questions probably because it fails to see the conflict between these varying interests in the above light, but rather treats the issue as an aside problem which could be taken care of by making minor adjustments of rights between the competing interests. It is my thesis that this conflict indicates a deeper conflict within the patent doctrine, which cannot be resolved by making such minor adjustments in right allocation. A proper appreciation of this conflict requires a deeper understanding of the property notions underlying the theoretical level of patent doctrine. This conflict within patent doctrine, if not resolved, could have a misdirecting effect upon the incidence of the patent law which would then not only defeat the purpose patent law seeks to achieve but rather act as an impediment in its own path to achieving its purpose. Further, the ‘incentive for investment’ argument for patents in fact accepted the reality that patent’s subject may not necessarily be an individual, but could be a corporate, or another body with enough capital to invest. Though in principle, patent was always and still is granted to an individual, but by recognizing the compulsory assignment to the employer-investor as the default rule in employment contracts, it recognizes non-individual, artificial persons to be the subject of patent law. The second part of the paper would study in some detail the various dynamics that govern the relationship between the employee and employer in their respective roles as ‘inventor’ and ‘investor’ within the patent system. Pre-Invention Assignment Agreement would be studied as the legal tool which governs this relationship and a jurisprudential analysis would be attempted. The final chapter would look at the conflict between the two interests more closely and try and draw some conclusions about the impact that this conflict may have upon the working of the patent system. It would be urged through this paper that there is a need to be more sceptical at our present practice of patenting, existing notions of the beneficiaries of the system and the objective that the patent system is to achieve. Our reliance on the uncritical understanding of the existing system and its working might defeat the very purpose for which the patent system exists. Into a New Paradigm To be able to understand the divide that exists within the theories upon which the modern patent doctrine is based, it would be important to study various historical and social reasons for this divide. There have been very few attempts made within the contemporary scholarship of patents to dig out these reasons due to which an attempt to find these reasons in the mainstream scholarship doesn’t yield much results. These reasons are to be found essentially in the literature dealing with intellectual property as a ‘labour indicator’ between employer-employee and not in historical accounts of patents because of which perhaps this theoretical divide has gone by and large unattended in the existing literature on intellectual property. A few scholars who have made attempts at studying the impact of intellectual property in shaping of modern employment relations argue that a paradigm shift took place at the turn of the 19th century in the way inventions were produced which had a great impact upon the legal protection that patent law extended to the inventors till then. Steven Cherensky calls it the shift in ‘Inventorship paradigm’ which he argues, caused the great changes in the practice of inventing and patenting that has brought the patent doctrine to an anomalous condition. ‘Inventorship paradigm’ can be defined as a certain set of common characteristics that exist between the different work environments in which inventions take place. The ‘Inventorship paradigm’ that existed till the end of 19th century was characterised by inventions that were less technical and needed very little investment and infrastructure unlike the modern inventions which emerge from the firms which possess these assets. Cherensky uses the metaphor “hero-inventor” to mark this paradigm in which inventions were essentially perceived as product of an individual’s efforts and choice wherein he played the part of both the ‘inventor’ and ‘entrepreneur’ and since inventions were, in their nature basic, simpler and non-technical, their requirements of infrastructure and investment was very minimal. In this paradigm, the inventor had absolute control over his inventions and hence enjoyed the fruits of it uninterrupted and undivided. ‘Inventorship’ and ‘Ownership’ were one and the same concept under the patent law in this paradigm as the inventor was the sole interest holder in the patent system . But this paradigm eroded with the ever-increasing ‘technocratization’ of inventions coupled with the felt need to make the ‘process of invention’ more organised and professional which lacked in the hitherto existing ‘inventorship paradigm’. Scholars argue that two major causes for the withering away of the existing paradigm shift are the process of ‘professionalization of invention’ and the rise of what were called ‘invention factories’ wherein the emerging firms were set-up to carry out the invention as any other manufacture in the factory. These scholars compare the jobs in an invention factory to the 19th century ‘assembly line jobs’ which had the effect of reducing output of the production process due to the repetitive and boring process involved. The early forms that these ‘invention factories’ took were industrial laboratories owned by influential scientists of their age like Thomas Edison soon thereafter followed by Eastman Kodak Industrial Research Laboratory established and the laboratories at Bell Telephone and DuPont. These new inventive spaces, which showed the capability to generate huge capital and set-up research infrastructure for creation of more organised, efficient and professionalized inventions, changed the perception of an ‘invention’ from being an individual’s stroke of inspiration to any other product whose nature and quality must be fixed by firm’s rational goal setting. As the firms became more professional and organised in their outlook towards ‘the process of invention’ their stakes in the inventions increased and the need to have more control over the rights accruing from these inventions was felt. Catherine L. Fisk in her recent work discusses the legal struggle that took place within these newly emerged ‘inventive spaces’ between the two classes of interest holder in the modern inventions. One class was that of the employers, capitalist and the owner who had now taken up the role of an ‘entrepreneur’ and derived its interest in the invention by virtue of the investment that it made to the form of infrastructure, capital and the organizational set-up that was required for carrying out research and development. The other class was that of the employee who were the ‘real inventors’ but were hired by these firms to carry out the process of invention in the laboratories and research units. Their interest in the invention was by virtue of the ‘intellectual labour’ that every process of invention (for that matter any creative enterprise) requires, essentially that upon which the first model of patent theories is based i.e. a reward system for those who expend their ‘intellectual labour’ in producing a new invention. In this modern set-up, the persons with technical qualifications were employed solely for the purpose of investing their mind into creating inventions of scope limited according to the pre-set business requirements of the firms that employed them. These inventions being a component of the larger goal setting process of the firms are to achieve ultimate goal of profit maximization for these firms and not to satisfy any intellectual curiosity of the inventor . Further, the incentive model upon which the intellectual property system was built, would crumble if the benefits of the reward system are diverted towards the firms that they worked for (i.e. the first class of interest holders in the process of invention), very little of which will be shared with the real inventors . Fisk discusses two cases to demonstrate the changing attitude of the courts towards the employee-inventor’s intellectual property that she produces in a firm that hires her and the rising concern for granting intellectual property rights in favour of the employer-investor . The latest breed of the class of ‘employer-investors’ is ‘the corporates’ which have almost completely replaced all other forms of public and private institutions that played the role of entrepreneur throughout the 20th century in the practice of inventing. With immense capital backing, modern infrastructure facilities and research laboratories these corporates employ a huge number of employees in both technical and non-technical sectors and hence are the biggest producers of modern inventions (in various technologies) today . With the changing trend in global trading from material goods to intangible property, these corporates’ stakes in the intellectual property produced by their employees has grown manifolds and so have the strategies for acquiring and controlling employee-inventor’s intellectual property. Apart from the rationale of such assignment having become more apparent and acceptable to courts , the dynamics that take place between the employer-employee regarding the ownership of rights has played a major role in the development of this default rule . Patent doctrine sure has a come long way from inducing importers to bring in new technology into the realm to a universal legal tool to stimulate invention as well as ensuring enough investment is made into R&D for the optimal development of science and development, though the modern trends in patenting and its incidental social costs cast a shadow of doubt upon the real success of the patent doctrine in achieving these ends. In the next section of this paper the most common tool used to acquire employee-inventor’s intellectual property i.e. ‘pre-invention assignment agreements’ will be discussed and how such assignment impacts the inventiveness of the employee-inventor and promotion and development of useful science and arts which is the ultimate objective of patent system. Pre-Invention Assignment Agreements Pre-Invention Assignment Agreements (PIAA) can be understood as an agreement between the employer and employee by virtue of which the employee agrees to assign all the rights in any future invention that such employee may create in the course of his employment. Courts have increasingly read ‘course of employment’ fairly broadly to include ‘using the equipment provided by the employer beyond working hours’, ‘building upon ideas conceived during the working hours’ and lately even the ‘ideas conceived before the employee was employed’ by the present employer . The real content of these agreements largely depends upon the bargaining capacities of the negotiating parties and is far from being certain. These agreements have today become a standard feature of the employment contracts that are used by the modern corporations employing technical and non-technical staff and are often offered on non-negotiable “take-it or leave-it” basis. Therefore, in this era of widely prevalent Pre-Invention Assignment Agreement, all the intellectual property generated by the employee-inventor is assignable to the employer-investor who then is the ultimate and sole beneficiary of the modern patent law. Many a theorists in the discipline of “law and economics” attribute the prevalence of preinvention assignment agreements to a form of market failure: labour monopsony and hence justify these agreements on the same basis upon which they justify the existence of a monopoly system of intellectual property rights i.e. in order to recoup the investments made into the ‘process of invention’. It is argued that in the absence of these agreements the patent rights in the invention would accrue to the employee-inventor who may then resort to anti-competitive behaviour against the interests of the employer-investor. The employer-inventor has substantial stakes in invention due to the investment that he puts into the ‘process of invention’ and such anti-competitive behaviour on the part of the employee-inventor would hurt the business of the employer. Hence there exists sound economic basis for Pre-Invention Assignment Agreements which have found a place in the second model of patent theories as a valid legal instrument. But this conventional understanding of the Pre-Invention Assignment Agreement becomes doubtful as some of the legal analyses have predicted detrimental effects of these agreements upon the ‘inventiveness’ of employee-inventors. Pre-Invention Assignment Agreements offer very peculiar problems at the interface of contract, patent and property law which makes their nature extremely complicated. A better understanding of the true legal nature of Pre-Invention Assignment Agreements would help us in appreciating the true role that it plays, as a legal tool complementing patent system, in dividing the intellectual property rights between the employer-investor and employee-inventor. Pre-Invention Assignment Agreement by their very nature try and commodify something other than the ‘invention’ (intellectual property), which is much more intangible in nature and hence can't be classified as ‘property’ in the right of an invention i.e. the ‘process of invention’. At the time of entering into the agreement there exists no invention to be assigned, the value of which is ascertained at this stage. At best there is a promise to assign any invention that the employee-inventor may (or may not) create in the course of his employment. In cases of ‘hired to invent’, the essential nature of the promise to assign remains unchanged with a mere difference that the employee-inventor is hired specifically to invest his intellect into the process of inventing which doesn’t by itself ensure ‘an invention’. Since neither the possibility of an invention, nor the value of such invention is known at the time of agreement, both parties are entering into a ‘speculative contract’ in which existence and adequacy of the consideration is uncertain. Cherensky says that Pre-Invention Assignment Agreements try to commodify and trade in the ‘process of inventing’ which is very different from commodifying any other process of labour wherein the product or the process of manufacture is tangible, its value ascertainable . Since an ‘invention’ essentially involves a process which is creative in nature there can’t be a fixed ‘method of inventing’ or a ‘process of invention’ by which such invention can be created, its impossible to predict its creation and its value. Since there is no invention existing at the time of the agreement, what parties trade into is the efforts, labour and intellect that the employee-inventor shall expend in order to produce a patentable invention. Once it is understood that the subject-matter of a Pre-Invention Assignment Agreements is not an invention but the ‘process of invention’, the difficulty these agreements pose for the property jurisprudence becomes clearer. Hence arises the question in contract, how can something that can’t be commodified or propertied be proper consideration in a contract? On employer’s part the consideration usually offered is no additional reward or benefit to the employee-inventor but merely ‘the job’ or ‘a continuance of such job’ which is subject to many other conditions other than those imposed by this agreement. Hence as far arises the question or Pre-Invention Assignment Agreement being a tool for ensuring equitable distribution of resources that an invention generates between inventor and investor, it remains doubtful. Policy behind the law of contract is a parity of status between the contracting parties according to which there is a degree of fairness that is assumed in all contractual transactions. But this policy assumption is not true in all the cases as under the principle of the ‘freedom to contract’ many a parties with unequal status or bargaining power often enter into contractual transactions and in such a case the terms obviously favour the stronger party. In the case of Pre-Invention Assignment Agreement which in the modern context are entered into by powerful corporations (employer) and an individual who is employed to carry out research and invent, it is quite obvious that parties don’t have equal bargaining power and hence employee-inventors often enter into such agreements on quite unfavourable terms. The situation is aggravated due to the tension between contract and property law in Pre-Invention Assignment Agreement i.e. ‘the process of invention’ which is impossible to commodify and quantify. The impossibility to quantify produces an uncertainty among parties as to their respective stakes in the invention. With employer-investor being a stronger market player, their may creep in an ‘information asymmetry’ in favour of such employer, which would further assist the employer is assessing its stakes in a particular ‘inventive process’ and hence draw the terms of the agreement more favourably. Pre-Invention Assignment Agreements pose these peculiar problems under contract and property jurisprudence which makes their nature highly volatile and their efficacy in patent law dubious. If an employee-inventor comes up with a valuable invention in the course of his employment which may not have been contemplated by either party to the Pre-Invention Assignment Agreement at the time of entering into the agreement, it would belong to the employer by virtue of the agreement. Cherensky calls such a situation “unfair surprise” in which employee would be taken by a shock to learn that he doesn’t have any rights in this great and valuable invention, especially if it wasn’t contemplated at the time of the agreement . Since the employer doesn’t have any positive obligation to share such benefits. Cherensky holds that such a situation would create a disincentive for the employee-inventor and hence might prove to be a counter-productive for the purposes of patent law . Many a scholars have tried to resolve this conflict within patent doctrine by providing various solutions which range from slight rearrangement in the allocation of rights between the interested parties to extreme ones like employees’ must unite and stop entering into pre-invention assignment agreements, others have taken sides. Most of these solutions are unimplementable due to various reasons and others hardly seem to understand the impact of the conflict upon the operation of patent law. None other than one address the conflict as a problem in the underlying property theories in the patent doctrine. Pre-Invention Assignment Agreements, as the legal tool attempting to balance the interests of two subjects of patent law i.e. ‘employee-inventor’ and ‘employer-investor’ operate on a conflict of interest situation occurring due to an underlying tension within the property theories and the contract principles that it is based on. This conflict may adversely affect the legal and social purpose of the patent law i.e. to stimulate individuals to invent leading to the progress of science and humankind. A lost Journey The dichotomy between inventor’s and investor’s interest within patent doctrine makes it difficult to ascertain which one is more primary to achieving the purposes of patent law. The failure of the existing scholarship to untangle this puzzle sure makes one wonder whether patent can contain this conflict within it without impacting its working towards its proposed ends. The normative justifications of patent law treat both these interests as one and the same or on alternative to exist harmoniously whereas the modern practice of patenting favours investor’s interests over the inventor’s. As shown in the previous chapter that the Pre-Invention Assignment Agreements act as a very important legal tool to complement the second school of theoretical justifications of patent system into almost entirely replacing the inventor from the focus of the patent by the investor. Moreover, the legal base upon which these agreements stand is so thin and reflects the confusion underlying the patent system that these agreements raise more problems than they resolve. The nature of the conflict between the two interests is such that, in its existing framework, the Pre-Invention Assignment Agreement cannot provide an acceptable solution to the conflict without undermining the purposes of the patent law. Steven Cherensky argues that the irresolvable nature of the conflict of interest is due to a failure of the existing theories of property to conceptualize the relative property stakes and interests each party has in ‘invention’. This failure is inherent to the existing patent doctrine which reflects the underlying conflict in the property jurisprudence. Cherensky offers a solution in which the ownership of inventions would be determined by the employee-inventor’s personhood stakes in the invention and the relative stakes of employer-investor. But the difficulty of assessing the relative stakes of the employer and also of assessing the personhood interests in inventions makes it difficult to implement it. All the scholars who have tried to provide solutions seem to pre-determine the primacy of one of the interest over the other before dealing with the issue which then provides a one-sided and ill-considered solution which tends to discount one interest for the other . All these scholars would fall into the framework of the mainstream scholarship of patents which at its core, finds the two interests to be in harmony with each other and hence don’t affect the purposes of the patent law. If these interests within patent doctrine are not prioritized, it won’t be wise to choose one over the other without fully understanding the impact of this choice upon the other and hence upon the ultimate purpose of patent law. Moreover it’s highly uncertain, what impact such subordination of a certain interests would have upon patent doctrine. Since the current practice of patenting favours the employer, personified in huge multi-national corporations (MNC), who engages in the business of developing technology by promoting invention within their organizational structures, it tends to treat below par the interests of the employee-inventor. The ‘employee-inventor’ represents the interests of an ‘inventor’ under the patent law, who has been at the focus of various theoretical justifications offered for the patent system from 18th century till late 20th century and has contributed largely to shaping of the modern intellectual property system to its current shape. Patent system has high stakes in the interests of the ‘employee-inventor’ which if undermined might have adverse impacts upon the ultimate objective of the patent system. Modern practice of corporate-patenting and an almost universal presence of broadly worded pre-invention assignment agreement between the inventors employed by these corporations assume that employment relations would take care of employee-inventor’s interest which is subordinated by employer-investor’s interest by the shift of patent incidence. The employment contracts are based on an equal bargaining capacity and status of both the parties involved, but it is seldom the case. Also, the previous account of the change in the self-perception of the modern employee-inventor who is largely dependent upon his employment and the salary derived from it to recoup the costs incurred in acquiring the technical skills and also to sustain him. In such a scenario it’s quite unwise to expect the unequal employment relations to take care of the interests of employee-inventors who hardly have any control over the terms of such contract and are offered to them on a ‘take-it or leave-it basis’. Existing scholarship in patent law shows that patent doctrine doesn’t even address this conflict, it becomes quite obvious that it doesn’t place itself in a position to assess its impact upon employee-inventor’s ‘inventiveness’. Even lesser it is in a position to offer any solutions to correct the problems that could be created by such misdirected or partial incidence. It is submitted modern practice of patenting delinks the object of the patent from its incidence and hence adversely affects the inventiveness of the real inventors i.e. ‘employee-inventors’. One may have to revisit and rethink over the underlying assumptions in the patent doctrine and would need to reassess the impacts of the modern practice of patenting upon the individual’s inventiveness and the resultant progress of science and welfare of society. Among various purposes attributed to the patent doctrine and various interests it takes care of, stimulating ‘individual inventiveness’ has been a very important one throughout the historical development of its theoretical justifications. It is not contended here that patents have a definite impact upon individual inventive faculties; on the contrary in the beginning of the paper a doubt as regards true impact of patent upon individual inventiveness was expressed. But the recent controversies surrounding the extensions of patents to new technology might indicate the likely effects of the misplaced incidence or neglected interests contained within patent doctrine. A race to patent ‘basic discoveries’ in the field of biomedical research shows the trend towards extension of patent from ‘creative inventions’ to mere discoveries, which then indicates the reduced inventiveness in these areas of research . Further, high rents sought from researchers for further academic research and medical practitioners for diagnosing and treatments leading to problem of uncured patients doesn’t really indicate any sort of progress of science in these fields of technologies, much less the welfare of society that must be achieved by the progress of science. Hence the modern trend in patenting might bring out the true impacts of these inherent conflict of interest within patent doctrine, which if not resolved would lead to its own doom. ENDNOTES These theories are discussed in great detail by William Fisher in “Theories of Intellectual property” available at www.law.harvard.edu/Academic_Affairs/coursepages/tfisher/iptheory.html John Locke, “Two Treatises of Government” (P. Laslett, ed., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970), Second Treatise, Sec. 27. “Intellectual labour” entitles the person who expends this labour property rights in such invention, in contrast to the ‘physical labour’, which doesn’t entitle the labourer to the rights over the product that he produces but merely a wage a salary. In this regard ‘intellectual labour’ is understood to be different from physical labour and also more worthy as it has an element of creativity to it, which is usually absent in physical labour. These justifications of patent system rule out the “Eureka model” of invention which says that inventions are created by an accident which often occurs while one tinkers with the existing ideas and techniques available to understand them better, and not necessarily trying to create something new as a patentable invention. William Landes and Richard Posner, "Trademark Law: An Economic Perspective," Journal of Law and Economics, 30 (1987): 265. Other works that address trademark law in similar terms include Nicholas Economides, “The Economics of Trademarks,” Trademark Reporter, 78 (1988): 523-39 and Daniel McClure, “Trademarks and Competition: The Recent History,” Law and Contemporary Problems, 59 (1996): 13-43. William Landes and Richard Posner, "An Economic Analysis of Copyright Law," Journal of Legal Studies, 18 (1989): 325. This argument is derived in substantial part from Jeremy Bentham, A Manual of Political Economy (New York: Putnam, 1839); John Stuart Mill, Principles of Political Economy, 5th ed. (New York: Appleton, 1862); and A. C. Pigou, The Economics of Welfare, 2nd ed. (London: Macmillan and Co., 1924). Steven Cherensky’s “A Penny for Their Thoughts: Employee-Inventors, Pre-invention Assignment Agreements, Property, and Personhood” 81 California L. Rev. 595 and Catharine L. Fisk’s “A Free Labour Ideology for the Ingenious Tinkerer: Class and the Ownership of Employee Patents, 1880-1925” still to be published. Ibid; Cherensky studies Pre-Invention Assignment Agreement in US employee-employer relationship and assess the implications that the alienation of the ‘patent incentive’ from the inventor would have upon the patent law. Cherensky proposes a theory by which the relative personhood interests employer and employees and accordingly share the patent return is shared between them. His theory is based on ‘personhood theory’ propounded by Radin. The term ‘inventions’ here is used to connote patentable inventions or those which received patent at the time they were invented, the changing notions of ‘invention’ within patent doctrine is not the subject matter of this paper. Cherensky sites Eli Whitney, Alexander Graham Bell, and Thomas Edison to illustrate his use of the term ‘hero-inventor’ which marked the early paradigm in which inventions took place. Cherensky makes this distinction between ‘inventorship’ and ‘ownership’ wherein Inventorship is significant primarily for determining the patentability of claims and the procedural sufficiency of a patent application. Patent ownership, by contrast, carries with it the temporary, exclusive right to make, use, or sell an invention. Cherensky argues that merger of science with invention took place in 18th century which caused ‘Professionalization of Invention’ thus: “This linking of science and invention resulted in the development of the modern engineering disciplines and modern technical education. The formalization of the engineering disciplines, in turn, resulted in the professionalization of invention.” Supra note 3 Institutionalization of the educational system led to the specialization in various technical and scientific fields at this time. These changes in the educational system played a very important part in creation of the class of technically trained persons who could be hired to invent in these modern ‘inventive spaces’. Fisk argues that the creation of these new class was marked with the new consciousness of their lowered status as an inventor which was an important impetus for the inventors to invent (apart from the monetary incentive that the existing patent system offered) Which is the primary motivation behind the choice of inventions that the inventors made. Fisk discusses a reward system which was established by a few firms in the beginning of the 20th century which was soon abolished as the employment relations between the inventor and the firms were found to be sufficient reward for the employee-inventors. Fisk links the doctrinal change to the changes in company practice through comparing court’s verdict in two leading Supreme Court decisions on ownership of employee patents. Fisk says: “Hapgood v. Hewitt (1886) is the high-water mark of the nineteenth century judicial solicitude for the rights of employee inventors. Standard Parts v. Peck (1924) repudiated the philosophy of Hapgood, although not it’s precise holding, and ushered in the twentieth-century regime of employer ownership of employee patents. The Court’s different approach to the rights and prospects of Horace Hewitt in 1886 and William Peck in 1924 reflects a profoundly different understanding of the necessity for upward mobility flowing from patent ownership in a democratic economy”. In the recent annual release of the top ten patent holders by USPTO shows corporates in various technologies such as computer software, hardware, electronics and photographic films holding the maximum patents in the US in that year. The trend of corporate patents has been same for quite a many years now. See Fisk’s paper for discussion on the changing judicial attitude towards favouring investor’s interests in allocation of patent rights, supra note 3. The common law rules developed by courts in 20th century and the legislations developed by some states in America are based on the model that all the inventions created by an employee in the course of his employment belong to the employer and hence are compulsorily assignable to the employer. Early 20th century cases in US courts set the stage for the following cases to develop this default rule of assignment. Adam Massoff, “Rethinking the development of patents: An Intellectual History, 1550-1800”, Hastings Law Journal, August 2001, 1255, traces in the history the various purposes patent law sought to achieve. He finds that ‘an importer’s’ interests is what drove the development of patent law at its early stages, where it existed mainly in the form of royal prerogatives. The notion of ‘an inventor’ came very late into the patent law, almost at the end of the 18th century due to the influence primarily of the Natural law theory. In a recent judgment by a Texas court, the ideas of the employee pre-conceived by him before joining the employment have been held to be assets of the employer. For further details about the case visit http://www.imakenews.com/employmentlaw/e_article000095809.cfm and www.unixguru.com Supra note 3. Ibid Ibid “Fact or Fiction: Legislative Control of Employer-Employee Ownership Rights in Inventions and Other Intellectual Property”, 1985 Pat. L. Ann. 7-1; Christopher M. Mislow, “Necessity May Be the Mother of Invention, but Who Gets Custody? The Ownership of Intellectual Property Created by an Employed Inventor”, 1 Computer & High-Tech. L.J. 59 (1985); “Employer's Rights to Inventions and Patents of Its Officers, Directors and Employees”, 18 Am. Intell. Prop. L. Ass'n Q.J. 127 (1990); “Incentives for People: The Forgotten Purpose of the Patent System”, 16 Harv. J. on Legis. 129 (1979); “Patent Law in the Context of Corporate Research”, 8 J. Corp. L. 497 (1983); William P. Hovell, Note, “Patent Ownership: An Employer's Rights to His Employee's Invention”, 58 Notre Dame L. Rev. 863 (1983) Merges P. Robert, “The Law and Economics of Employee Inventions”, Harv. Journal of Law and Technology, Vol. 13, No. 1 Fall 1999; Orbak Y. Barak, “The Law and Economics of Creativity in the Workplace”, http://www.law.harvard.edu/programs/olin_centre/ Micheal A. Hellar and Rebecca S. Eisenberg, “Can patents deter innovation? The Anticommons in Biomedical Research” Science 280, 698–701 (1998); Lori B Andrews, “Genes and patent policy: Rethinking intellectual property rights”, Nature Vol. 3 October 2003 and Paul A. David, “The Digital Technology Boomerang: New Intellectual Property Rights Threaten Global “Open Science” World Bank Conference Volume ABCDE-2000. From prashant at wannabelawyer.com Tue Sep 21 12:43:38 2004 From: prashant at wannabelawyer.com (Prashant Iyengar) Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 12:43:38 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Final version of my paper In-Reply-To: <20040921054656.76134.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040921054656.76134.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200409211243.38596.prashant@wannabelawyer.com> Dear All, I'm attaching the final version of my paper as part of the Student Fellowship of Sarai-Alf. For those who were there, It's a much scaled down version of my presentation at the workshop. Hope you'll like it. Warm Regards, PRashant -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: author.rtf Type: text/rtf Size: 105460 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/commons-law/attachments/20040921/ec846ec5/attachment.rtf From paivakil at yahoo.co.in Thu Sep 23 11:05:35 2004 From: paivakil at yahoo.co.in (Mahesh T. Pai) Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 11:05:35 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] reforming Wipo Message-ID: <20040923053535.GA6540@nandini.home> http://lwn.net/Articles/103199/ http://www.cptech.org/ip/wipo/genevadeclaration.html http://www.cptech.org/ip/wipo/futureofwipodeclaration.pdf -- Mahesh T. Pai <<>> http://paivakil.port5.com It's not the software that's free; it's you. From shamnadbasheer at yahoo.co.in Thu Sep 23 18:47:53 2004 From: shamnadbasheer at yahoo.co.in (Shamnad Basheer) Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 14:17:53 +0100 (BST) Subject: [Commons-Law] reforming Wipo In-Reply-To: <20040923053535.GA6540@nandini.home> Message-ID: <20040923131753.81335.qmail@web8403.mail.in.yahoo.com> Thanks for this Mahesh: This should have been done a long time back-but better late than never. I particularly like the proposed temporary moratarium on all efforts at standardization of IP norms internationally (which more often than not translates to increased IP protection). Perhaps this kind of declaration would also ensure that WIPO doesnt succumb to corporate pressure and back out of open source talks/workshops. Regards-Shamnad --- "Mahesh T. Pai" wrote: > > http://lwn.net/Articles/103199/ > http://www.cptech.org/ip/wipo/genevadeclaration.html > http://www.cptech.org/ip/wipo/futureofwipodeclaration.pdf > > > -- > Mahesh T. Pai <<>> > http://paivakil.port5.com > It's not the software that's free; it's you. > _______________________________________________ > commons-law mailing list > commons-law at sarai.net > https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/commons-law > ________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your life partner online Go to: http://yahoo.shaadi.com/india-matrimony From paul at waag.org Fri Sep 24 03:55:02 2004 From: paul at waag.org (paul keller) Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 00:25:02 +0200 Subject: [Commons-Law] Declaration on the Future of WIPO -- call for signatures Message-ID: <693B1A7F-0DAF-11D9-BB6D-000D93C0E134@waag.org> as i havent seen this issue come along here and i am forwarding this call to this list. it seems that the indian government is not supportive of the the Brazilian/Argentinean initiative (at least that is what i am told) so that support for suport from indian organisations would be especially welcome... best, paul ***Please distribute widely*** The World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) is one of the major policy makers in the field of intellectual property (IP). The governments of Brazil and Argentina have recently put forward a 'Proposal for the Establishment of a Development Agenda for WIPO', to be discussed at the upcoming WIPO General Assembly on Sep 27-Oct 2, 2004 . Along with them, many others believe that WIPO needs to seriously reconsider its agenda, adopting a fairer approach to IP policy making. The 'Geneva Declaration on the Future of WIPO' calls upon WIPO to react to those concerns. If you are supportive of the Declaration, please send your name (and affiliation, if any) to: For questions, contact Thiru or Manon The Declaration is coming out of a recent meeting on the 'Future of WIPO' organised by the Transatlantic Consumer Dialogue (TACD) in Geneva. The drafting group has been convened by the Consumer Project on Technology, the Center for the Study of the Public Domain, and the Information Program of the Open Society Institute. From jeebesh at sarai.net Fri Sep 24 19:52:56 2004 From: jeebesh at sarai.net (Jeebesh Bagchi) Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 19:52:56 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] reforming Wipo In-Reply-To: <20040923131753.81335.qmail@web8403.mail.in.yahoo.com> References: <20040923131753.81335.qmail@web8403.mail.in.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41542DC0.4080509@sarai.net> We just got an email on this. best j ------------- From: "Maria Julia Oliva" To: Dear friends, Vera Franz mentioned this might be of interest; please see below. Thanks, Julia As you know, forum-shopping by developed countries is a growing concern. In intellectual property, the flexibilities of the TRIPS Agreement and important statements such as the TRIPS and Health Declaration are being undermined by WIPO and FTA negotiations. Over the last few years developing countries and development-oriented NGOs have raised serious questions regarding the implications of intellectual property rules on the socio-economic, cultural and sustainable development, but WIPO has not taken them into account. Now, some developing countries are demanding WIPO take development into account. A proposal presented by Brazil, Argentina, Bolivia, Kenya, Venezuela and others demands that WIPO establish a "development dimension" within its activities. It demands that WIPO activities and programs be guided by the development goals of the UN, particularly the Millennium Development Goals, and respond to the significant problems posed by intellectual property protection for developing countries, local communities, women, poor farmers, indigenous peoples, etc. The proposal also highlights the importance of increasing stakeholder participation, particularly of public interest NGOs. The proposal will be presented at the WIPO General Assembly next week and it is crucial that, beyond the details, NGOs support the idea that development should be considered in everything WIPO does. A group of Geneva NGOs, including CIEL, IATP, IGTN, PSI, TWN, and others have put together the enclosed letter to support the process ( I am also enclosing the countries' proposal in English and Spanish). Please let me know at joliva at ciel.org by the end of the week if your organization would like to sign on to the letter. Thanks! Julia --- Maria Julia Oliva Director - Project on Intellectual Property and Sustainable Development Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) 15 rue des Savoises 1205 - Geneva, Switzerland (41-22) 789-0738 Shamnad Basheer wrote: >Thanks for this Mahesh: > >This should have been done a long time back-but better >late than never. I particularly like the proposed >temporary moratarium on all efforts at standardization >of IP norms internationally (which more often than not >translates to increased IP protection). Perhaps this >kind of declaration would also ensure that WIPO doesnt >succumb to corporate pressure and back out of open >source talks/workshops. > >Regards-Shamnad > > > --- "Mahesh T. Pai" wrote: > > >>http://lwn.net/Articles/103199/ >>http://www.cptech.org/ip/wipo/genevadeclaration.html >> >> >> >http://www.cptech.org/ip/wipo/futureofwipodeclaration.pdf > > >>-- >> Mahesh T. Pai <<>> >>http://paivakil.port5.com >>It's not the software that's free; it's you. >>_______________________________________________ >>commons-law mailing list >>commons-law at sarai.net >>https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/commons-law >> >> >> > >________________________________________________________________________ >Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your life partner online >Go to: http://yahoo.shaadi.com/india-matrimony >_______________________________________________ >commons-law mailing list >commons-law at sarai.net >https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/commons-law > > > From jeebesh at sarai.net Fri Sep 24 19:57:16 2004 From: jeebesh at sarai.net (Jeebesh Bagchi) Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 19:57:16 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Garry Larson and farside cartoons Message-ID: <41542EC4.5020506@sarai.net> Solly brought to my notice this letter by Garry Larson (of Farside cartoon strip fame) to his fans. This led to many sites being closed. Looking for fans response to this. best j --------------------- They're closing the site... Here's the letter that caused me to remove the cartoons from the net. Make up your own mind about it: Re: On-line Use of The Far Side Cartoons TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: I'm walking a fine line here. On the one hand, I confess to finding it quite flattering that some of my fans have created Web sites displaying and/or distributing my work on the Internet. And on the other, I'm struggling to find the words that convincingly but sensitively persuade these Far Side enthusiasts to "cease and desist" before they have to read these words from some lawyer. What impact this unauthorized use has had (and is having) in tangible terms is, naturally, of great concern to my publishers and therefore to me -- but it's not the focus of this letter. My effort here is to try and speak to the intangible impact, the emotional cost to me personally, of seeing my work collected, digitized and offered up in cyberspace beyond my control. Years ago, I was having lunch one day with the cartoonist Richard Guindon, and the subject came up of how neither one of us ever solicited or accepted ideas from others. But until Richard summed it up quite neatly, I never really understood my own aversion to doing this: "It's like having someone else write in your diary," he said. And how true that statement rang with me. In effect, we drew cartoons that we hoped would be entertaining or, at the very least, not boring; but regardless, they would always come from an intensely personal, and therefore original, perspective. To attempt to be "funny" is a very scary, risk-laden proposition. (Ask any stand-up comic who has ever "bombed" on stage.) But if there was ever an axiom to follow in this business, it would be this: Be honest to yourself and -- most important -- respect your audience. So, in a nutshell (probably an unfortunate choice of words for me), I ask only that this respect be returned, and the way for anyone to do that is to please, please refrain from putting The Far Side out on the Internet. These cartoons are my "children" of sorts, and like a parent I'm concerned about where they go at night without telling me. And seeing them at someone's Web site is like getting the call at 2:00 a.m. that goes, "Uh, Dad, you're not going to like this much, but guess where I am." I hope my explanation helps you to understand the importance this has for me personally, and why I'm making this request. Please send my "kids" home. I'll be eternally grateful. Most respectfully, Gary Larson From mayur at nls.ac.in Fri Sep 24 12:08:46 2004 From: mayur at nls.ac.in (mayur at nls.ac.in) Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 12:08:46 +0530 (IST) Subject: [Commons-Law] (no subject) Message-ID: <3972.202.54.87.179.1096007926.squirrel@202.54.87.179> Dear All, I've attached my paper titled "Policing the Networks and Practices of Video" here. Any comments or suggestions would be appreciated. Mayur -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: sarai paper[1].rtf.doc Type: application/octet-stream Size: 71680 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/commons-law/attachments/20040924/f8f516e7/attachment.obj From jeebesh at sarai.net Fri Sep 24 20:03:42 2004 From: jeebesh at sarai.net (Jeebesh Bagchi) Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 20:03:42 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] POLICING THE NETWORKS AND PRACTICES OF VIDEO Message-ID: <41543046.7080800@sarai.net> I am posting a plain text version of Mayurs text. Please friends post plain text version for the list with a proper subject heading. This are getting archived and is important that be available to public. Attachment are not properly archived. best jeebesh POLICING THE NETWORKS AND PRACTICES OF VIDEO (Mayur) This paper is about video. It seeks to provide a primarily ethnographic account of the introduction of video in the 1980’s, amidst the fanfare of modernity, and its quiet demise with the emergence of VCD’s. It seeks to provide the cultural history of a media form, in an era of the disengagement of the State, an era when “technology” and “communication” are the new mantras of modernity and development; it seeks to provide a narrative of the various practices and networks that emerged around video. modernity and video “Deccan Herald, 1981: Union Information Minister Vasant Sathe told newsmen here today that his Ministry had put up the proposal to the Cabinet. For external channels the Asian Games will be telecast in colour. But Internal colour transmission was still a big question mark. Mr. Sathe, said colour TV must be introduced. "Black and white is dead technology. Dead like a dodo," he said. Colour technology was the latest and India must have it. should take a quantum jump in technology where it is today instead of going back 50 years." He, however, admitted his inability to ensure that decision making on this question would be quick by saying "the inability for decision making is because of the constraints in the system of our country". Mr. Sathe said: ‘If I had my way I will go in for VCR (Video Cassettes) right away. Cassettes can be produced in thousands and they are cheap. Every village and school can screen its own video cassettes.” From the news clipping above it is clear that the then ‘latest’ technology of colour television and video, is cast in terms of a new march forward, a leap into modernity. Prior to the introduction of video technology in India, with the New Delhi Asian Games in 1984, television and video technology are seen as luxury items, a commodity not meant for the general public; and with prohibitive import duties, and a cost of around 50,000 rupees for a vcr, video technology remained a commodity of elite consumption. However, by the early 1980’s the proliferation of video technology was seen as the path to the new modernity. This aspiration of ‘new modernity’ was different from the older, more material Nehruvian modernity. For example, Nehru’s statement that ‘dams are the temples of modern India’, is characteristic of the “era of hardware, or heavy modernity – the bulk-obsessed modernity ‘the larger is better’ kind of modernity. (This was) the epoch of weighty and ever more cumbersome machines, of the ever longer factory walls wider factory flows and ingesting ever more factory crews…To conquer space was the supreme goal – to grasp as much of it which one could hold, and to hold to it, marking it all over with tangible tokens of possession and “No Trespassing” boards.” While the Nehruvian nationalist project looked at modernity as the creation of ‘order’ and ‘development’, which necessitated robust state action, the pursuit of modernity through technology emancipated “the state-managers from the everyday, the interaction with place. In other words the annihilation of space through time would obtain without the messy political problems that spatiality and its associated politics, produced. What was needed was a solution that would shift from old style nationalist policies, seen by the elite as restricting initiative and growth.” This ‘national’ space was gradually given away under the name of globalisation, a process that accelerated by the late 1980’s and the early 1990’s. Under pressure from institutions such as the IMF and the World Bank, the old import substitution regime was gradually taken apart and controls on domestic industry and multinational companies were abandoned. As observed by Ravi Sundaram “‘Development’ remained an issue but was reconstituted as a problem of communication. The way forward was computerization, networking and a new visual regime based on a national television network…As opposed to the Nehruvian focus on 19th century physical instruments of accumulation (steel, energy, coal), state discourse after 1984 posed a virtual space where issues of development would be resolved. Through public lectures, television programmes and press campaigns, state managers simulated this new space, which though unseen was seen as transcending the lack inherent in Nehruvian controls.” Bauman terms this as fluid modernity, which is the “epoch of disengagement, elusiveness, facile escape and hopeless chase. In ‘liquid’ modernity, it is the most elusive, those free to move without notice, who rule.” However, while this new fluid modernity was seen to be embraced by the state, the old modernity’s desire to maintain the paramouncy of order remained. This disengagement coupled with the emergence of such new media is significant in that, as Peter Manuel states, “they (the new media) constitute a challenge to the one-way monopolistic, homogenising tendencies of the old media (especially cinema, television and radio). The new media tend to be decentralised in ownership and control, and consumption patterns; they offer greater potential for consumer input and interaction, and heighten the user’s control over the form of consumption and over the relation to the media sender.” These processes of disengagement and the proliferation of new media allowed for the emergence of spaces that were quickly occupied by a number of networked actors; the producers and assemblers of video, the recorders and the pirates, the distributors, exhibitors and the viewers. networks and practices Therefore, the physical components of video, the shell, the magnetic tape and the VCR, were loci for a multitude of networks, of cultural practices of production and consumption. At the beginning of the 1980’s everything was imported. The owner of Geeth, a store on SP road states “Everything was smuggled. In 1979, 1980, 1981, some two years after that everything was smuggled. From Taiwan, and Bangkok. Then people in Bombay started making the shells. It is a very simple process. Just put plastic in a mould and khatam. This mould cost some Rs. 70,000 if it was imported. Later they started to make it in India, so the mould cost some Rs 40,000. They started making shells in Peenya also. Each shell cost about 17-18 rupees.” The production of the magnetic tape appears to have been far less decentralized. Originally, like the shell, the magnetic tape was imported. Says the owner of GR marketing, once a supplier of blank video cassettes on SP road, “The Magnetic tape was manufactured by only 6 companies in India. In Bombay and Delhi. So we used to get from there. It cost about 30 to 50 rupees for 180 minutes of tape. It came as one pancake. We then put the pancake in one machine, a loader. We used to put the pancake in and it used to cut for however long we wanted it. It put the film around the reel and put the leader, and it then we put it in the shell. Our machine cost about 50,000. It was semi-automatic. But there used to be loaders from 5,000 to one lakh also. At first people used to get it from Bombay, but then it was available here in Bangalore also. We used to supply to all these new video libraries, but once they became rich they had their own loaders, then after that we sold to public only.” The blank tapes from distributors like GR marketing flowed down the network to everyday consumers, to persons who merely pirated videos and sold these, to video library and parlour owners who also copied videos. Videotronics on SP road is one of the people to whom GR Marketing initially supplied blank video cassettes to. He says “I used to get original videos from some friends on SP road, and then sometimes from friends in Madras. First, I recorded the cassettes in this shop itself. Sometimes one is to 3 sometime one is to 14. I made money from selling video cassettes, and I bought VCR’s with that money. The brands were National and Panasonic. Cost about 10,000 rupees. We used to buy from Bombay. First I got cassettes from this GR Marketing fellow. . Blank cassette used to cost about Rs 40 to make and Rs 50 to sell. They were for 3 hours. All these recorded cassettes were sold for Rs. 80. Then after that I made my own cassettes. I bought one loader. I used to make my own cassettes. So the magnetic film used to come in one pancake, I used to put it in a loader and then it used to cut and reel the film to a certain length. And then I used to record and put it in the shell and then sell it.” There also appears to have a great deal of networking between video library owners. Prabhu, a video library owner in Austin town says “We were always talking about movies. Me and my friend. So we bought one VCR player and that time it was in demand and we started hiring it out. So he bought one and we became partners so we said “why not we open a library with that?”. We invested a little money and bought some cassettes. One other guy next to Galaxy theatre, Sagar King it’s called. He helped us out. We stocked initially 300 cassettes. That guy, Sagar King near Galaxy theatre, since we knew him, whatever extra cassettes that he had we took it from his shop. The 5000 rupees we invested, we bought a VCP. I bought a VCP and my partner bought a VCP. And we said okay we are partners. Which ever goes out we share the profit, and if both go out we share the profit. So we spoke to that guy. We said that there’s a shop. It was an egg shop. We told him ‘give us some place.’ We will pay you whatever rent you want. We’ll have a video cassette shop. He was very happy. He said egg shop being converted to a cassette shop. He was very happy. So this Sagar King guy said ‘okay I’ll give you 300 tapes, and you have to give me 1 rupee per tape everyday.’ So it was 300 rupees everyday. No matter 10 goes out or 20 goes out. It was very good. We took all the 300 kept it in the shop, and we started distributing pamphlets everywhere. The response was excellent. Whenever there were new movies, everyone wanted them. We used to run, get the movies give them. Business was traveled like anything. We had a fantastic business immediately. ‘Cause we were the first people to start. From far away places people used to come for English Hindi, Tamil and all that. So later we said that this money was not enough, so we took another partner. And then we took the whole egg shop, because we said we didn’t want eggs. So he also joined us as a partner. So then we started off the full fledged cassettes shop. So business was very good. We went on like 4 –5 years like that.” By the late 1980’s there international linkages emerge. Says Prabhu: “none of these distributors were there in Bombay, like they have now. Only Bambino was there, Video Palace was there, that’s it. Not as many distributors as there are now. Those days there was a guy called Mansur. He used to supply in the name of Horse. He used to get them from Dubai. Those days all the Hindi movies used to come from Dubai. I mean the good prints. They used to go there, and get us good prints and on Friday, Saturday it used to be in India. Because Friday is a holiday there, and Thursday the print goes from here. They copied and then they used to send. In Fridays it used to be in every library in India. So that’s how it was. So we used to make copies and circulate.” The practices that surround the viewing of cinema appear to be equally diverse. Apart from video libraries, there were video parlours – mini theatres that showed movies via VCR and a television, touring video parlours – matador vans fitted with televisions and VCR’s, that went around and showed movies. In the early days of video when the VCR was prohibitively expensive, watching video used to be a community whole night affair. Says PK “Sometimes people would say that we have a TV, but no VCR. So we would like to see some movie, in our house, with our friends and family. So, since we were purchasing the cassettes and giving them on rent, we thought it would be profitable to purchase a VCR and give it to rent to somebody. So just to see if the copy is proper we had a VCR in our house. So the idea started that our own VCR, we give on rent to somebody we got some profits. We thought we would have one or two extra VCR’s and who ever wanted we could circulate that also. Rent was to my knowledge, 100 rupees a day. And a VCR at that time was costing say 15000 rupees. A lot of brands were there. There was Akai and another was national, pioneer… We used to take addresses, because the amount was 15000, no body could pay that much. But normally only the nearby residences would come. We would like to see their house and would like to have some guarantee. We did not lend it to everyone. If we gave it to some college student, because he would run away with it. We gave it to family people where address is properly known. When ppl took the vcr they would like to use it to the fullest extent. So the rent was for one day, so at the most they could watch 3 movies of 3 hours length. With reduction of prices of VCR’s viewership became relatively more decentralized. Says Vikram “me and my friends used to rent Jackie Chan movies, James bond movies and some time after that we used to borrow adult films and stuff. We used to borrow on the weekends. We borrowed 2-3 movies at one time. We used to have a free day after exams and stuff, so we went to a friends house and watched 2-3 movies. With my family, I used to rent mostly family movies. Mostly Hindi, because that time we couldn’t find English movies. But we used to watch old English movies like superman. With my friends we used to get latest world war flicks or Jackie Chan movies.” Says Mariam “I remember we used to stay up late at night and wait for music videos to come on DD. My brothers and I used to record them and sometimes we used to trade them as well. What fun.” Aju says that he used to record WWF matches and exchange them with friends. the erosion of order When video technology was first introduced in India, it almost appeared as if ‘order’ was inherent in the technology, that the introduction of a new technology would, of its own accord, bring the scientific temperament, development and social organisation, that modernity so craved. In 1980, the National Working Group on Film Policy headed by Dr. Shivaram Karanth recommended that import duties on video technology be reduced, and that video technology should be used by “educational institutions, field publicity units of the government and other specialised agencies involved in community development and rural educational programmes.” Thus, video in the early days, with order seemingly implicit in its technology, remained largely uncontrolled. However, as is true of many things controlled or otherwise, order is surely, yet slowly, eroded. Through everyday practices, without larger any larger notions of community, actors within the emerging network of video chipped away at this order, this new modernity. When PK, started his video parlour in the late 80’s he was visited by the police a number of times. But he says that the police also had no idea of how or if they were empowered to regulate the video parlour. His story: “What kind of problems? Yes… mainly police. They used to come and say why you are showing this? What permission have you got? So initially, in the beginning there were no rules, no permission, so we said that we do not know what permission we have to bring. That’s the way we were watching movies in our house. In fact the way this idea came that I was running a restaurant. In restaurant I was selling tea coffee bondas and snacks. So in the dull hours there were hardly any people. so just there was a radio or a gramophone in the restaurant to entertain the customers. One would play radio. So the bright idea come to our mind that let’s have TV and show on TV this video pictures. So when the video was on in the restaurant and there was regular table and chair, and people used to drink coffee and eat snacks and watch the movie freely. Somebody would watch for 10 minutes, half an hour 2 hours. Some crazy people might watch for entire 3 hours, enjoying one coffee. So then we observed that the business started growing steadily. Within one month we realised that business is more, and when we started the movie, it was house full. People used to sit for three hours, but we didn’t much business. So slowly, slowly it came to our mind that if you order one thing you cannot sit for more than one hour. So if you wanted to see the whole picture for 3 hours you had to order 3 times. And there were chairs on both sides and half the people were sitting ulta. So slowly, slowly we thought, let us forget the benches and let everyone face the TV side, and we offered them only coffee in the hand. We closed down the puri bhaaji and heavy snacks, for which you require a table, and slowly, slowly we increased the coffee charge also and then slowly, slowly we thought, you give us 10 rupees, forget coffee. So this is how it all started. So then it came to the knowledge of police, and it came to knowledge of tax people. Police came and enquired so the police was also not very sure what section to book us, what rules to be applied. But for some time the police was giving us warning, saying you see we also don’t know what is to be done, but something is to be done. Now there is a queue and people are making rush, and there is some nuisance near the place and all this nuisance how to tolerate and all. And in the mean time sales tax people also approached saying all these cinema’s are paying tax now you are charging and showing. In the beginning we were telling that like radio, we are showing TV. So what we should do. Our customers are eating and viewing free of charge. Since the TV is lying empty in my house, I bring it in the morning and when I go home I take it home and sleep. I am the owner of the hotel and I am keeping it. So that’s how they were also confused. So then we were showing movies only, it was unable for us to also explain more. Then some tax people forced some penalty also. Rightly or wrongly, we paid that little penalty also and then police also said that something should be done. So ultimately we went to some lawyer. So lawyer said if that is the thing let us go to court. So ultimately we went to court. And the court first time gave the direction, since there are no rules, government must make some rules, and till that time the stay is granted, and no government body shall disturb these people. They are doing it for their livelihood, so let it continue. So it was continued for a few months.” Thus far the state exercised control over the media – doordarshan, the radio, and cinema. It exercised control over cinema through the actual control of the spaces of cinema, the theatres. This control over the spaces of cinema meant that, apart from the tool of censorship, the state could control the content of cinema as well. With the introduction of video, however, the state was presented with a crisis of its regulatory authority. The regulatory regimes of cinema were ill-suited to control a more slippery media such as video; video had no fixed spaces such as cinema, could be smuggled, undetected across borders, and hence the state not only lost control over the actual space of a media, but also the ability to police the content of the media as well. the return to order The entry of video in 1982 caught the state off guard. The introduction of video and other new media was supposed to usher India into the order of modernity, but instead it found this modernity being recycled and reworked by cultural practices. The state found that it lacked the means of controlling the content of video and the spaces in which video was watched. The anxiety over the inability to exercise control over video is well expressed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court: “The dangers to which people would be exposed if the petitioners are allowed to run their restaurants as mini cinemas without any regulation are obvious. There would be risk to the safety and health of persons visiting those restaurants. Overcrowding outside and inside the restaurants when a popular movie is being exhibited would create problems of public order. Further, many of the proprietors would be tempted to indulge in exhibiting pirated and blue films.” The state, therefore, appears to have been concerned with several things. First is that of property. The piracy of video cassettes lead to grave concerns of intellectual property. Take, for example, this news clipping: “MPA (Motion Picture Association of America) sees cable TV piracy as a serious problem in India. in a report published almost a year ago, it estimated that there were 50,000 cable-TV systems in India, most, if not all, using pirated and/or unauthorised products, including titles of its member companies. The report notes that most titles are available on Indian cable-systems within weeks of their theatrical release in the USA. It has estimated its member- company losses at about 40 million dollars a year…Most of the video-cassettes seized in Bangalore today were laser prints of the latest blockbuster movies…MPA had tipped off the Bangalore police about the large-scale pirating of video films in unauthorised video-parlours. MPA sources told this correspondent that they had also heard reports that "Casper" (recently released in a Bangalore cinema-theatre) and "Waterworld" (yet to be released in India) had also been pirated. There are also reports that one of the places raided had 80 VCRs (video-cassette recorders) for making copies but that, at the time of the raid, it was found that legal work was being done. The official press-release says that, on the receipt of credible information by the Indian representative of the MPA and its verification, simultaneous raids were launched in four video-parlours and a residential house located in different parts of the city and that the police seized 3,979 cassettes of English films.” The next thing that concerned the state, appears to be the inability to exercise censorship over what was being watched. The sudden lack of the ability to censor what was being watched was another great anxiety of the state. The one police officer I spoke to repeatedly emphasized that the police conducted raids because people were showing and distributing uncensored films. These two concerns appear to lead to the third: the anxiety of the crowd, both in the physical and virtual sense. Commenting on the concerns of the physical crowd of the colonial administration with regard to the construction of theatres in the early 1900’s, Stephen Hughes, observes that “The idea of crowds of Indian working-class men gathering for film shows in close proximity to important government institutions would have made Madras officials uneasy. The daily collecting of crowds in the street outside Crown theatre at regular intervals before a film show and then, after being emotionally galvanized through the collective experience of film-watching, existing together on to the streets again, would have made the police authorities particularly concerned. The colonial government of India had long recognised crowds, especially those of religious processions and at dramatic performances as a potentially uncontrollable threat to the political and social order. The very notion of collective gatherings, even at places of public entertainment, carried the assumed connotation of riotous mobs, revolutionary masses which could be mobilized against the colonial authority.” While police in the 1980’s probably did not fear the “revolutionary masses” that so concerned the colonial administration, they still approached large crowds with unease. As, PK earlier stated that the initial police concern with regard to his video parlour was the “halla that was created around the video parlour and the crowd of college kids and other kadaka types in residential localities”. But the crowd that appears to be feared is not merely the physical crowd, but also the unseen, the virtual crowd. The idea that people could be watching films that remained hidden from the state’s gaze, appears to cause great anxiety with the state. Apart from intellectual property concerns the exhibition and distribution of ‘adult’ pornographic films, was cited as the primary motivation for conducting raids on video parlours and libraries. These three concerns translated into attempts to control firstly, the physical aspects of the VCR and the video cassettes. In 1983, the Government of India issued a notification under the Sections 4 and 7 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (13 of 1885) and sections 4 and 10 of the Indian Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1933 (17 of 1933) requiring that every video cassette recorder be registered with the District Magistrate. In 1985 these rules were repealed, but interestingly the notification is still in force in States of Arunachal Pradcsh, Assam, Jammu and Kashmir, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland and Tripura, and in the Union Territories of Andaman and Nicobar Islands and Lakshadweep and Minicoy Islands; another indication that the state may fear the virtual crowd in areas where the idea of the nation is most contested. Much later in 1994, s. 52A of the Copyright Act, was passed. Clause 2 reads “(2) No person shall publish a video film in respect of any work unless the following particulars are displayed in the video film, when exhibited, and on the video cassette or any other container thereof, namely :- (a) if such work is a cinematograph film required to be certified for exhibition under the provisions of the Cinematograph Act, 1952 (37 of 1952), a copy of the certificate granted by the Board of Film Certification under Section 5-A of that Act in respect of such work; (b) the name and address of the person who has made the video film and a declaration by him that he has obtained the necessary license or consent from the owner of the copyright in such work for making such video film; and (c) the name and address of the owner of the copyright in such work.” Controlling the spaces of video, in particular the video parlour, also occupied a great deal of the state’s attention. Initial attempts at regulating video parlours, involved bring video parlours under the various States’ Cinema (Regulation) Acts. These legislations, and the rules made under them, which originally concerned theatres alone, were sought to be applied to video parlours as well. So in Deepak Snack Bar v. State of Haryana, and in Restaurant Lee v. State of Madhya Pradesh, the relevant High Courts extended the application of the Cinema (regulation) acts to Video parlours as well. They held that that a video would fall within the ambit of the term ‘cinematograph’ and hence would attract the application and the cinema licensing requirements of the acts. This view was upheld by the Supreme Court in the 1993 case of Laxmi Video Talkies and others v. State of Haryana and others. Therefore, in order to legally exhibit films via video, a license must be obtained, and the provisions of the censorship requirements of both the acts were required to be met, giving the state the leverage to again control what was being viewed in these parlours. By the end of the 1980’s many states had passed legislations or rules specifically relating to video parlours and video libraries. Take for example the Uttar Pradesh (Regulation of Exhibition by means of Video) Rules, 1988. These rules provide in excruciating detail, the spatial requirements of video parlours, touring and permanent. Rule 4 (2) , for example, reads: “(2) The building shall be provided with open space of not less than 3 metres in width on any two sides, and open space of not less than 6 metres in width in front for parking of vehicles. If the building is away from thoroughfare, the approach road shall not be less than 3 metres in width (3) The building – shall be well built, structurally safe, and constructed with non-inflammable material; shall be sufficiently ventilated; shall have a 1.6 metres wide verandah on anyone side of the doorways of the building; shall have atleast one doorway per 50 seats and in any case not less than two, fitted with door to open outwards and the size of the doors shall not be less than 1.95 metres in height and1.34 metres in width; the normal height of the roof or its immediate covering from the floor shall not be less than 3.5 metres with electric installations fitted at a height of 2.75 metres; shall have the landings, doors, staircases, lobbies and corridors of not less than 1.34 metres in width (4) In case the auditorium is constructed on the first floor of a building, it shall have 1.6 metres wide verandah on any two sides with atleast two stair cases to ground floor on two different sides, out of which one should abut the main thoroughfare. The width of the stair case shall not be less than 1.34 metres with 16 cms. riser and 25 cms tread and there shall not be less than 3 and not more than 15 stairs at a stretch. The open space required under sub-rule (2) shall be provided on the ground floor….” In a similar fashion, every particular detail, in terms of dimensions and quality is provided for seating arrangements, and the seats themselves, ventilators, sanitation (including the direction that latrines and urinals “shall be cleaned and flushed after every exhibition and disinfectants used daily”), drinking water, and electric installations. And soon enough, these elaborate legislations and rules governing video begin to look like a foucaultian process of disciplining. Through the rules which govern miniscule details, these laws appear as “techniques for assuring the ordering of human multiplicities.” video in the 90’s By the beginning of the 90’s, the state and the law appear to have pushed the several of the more illegal practices surrounding video, further from public view. The fear that every potential customer was also a potential company agent, on the look out for pirated video’s meant that pirated copies were put on lower shelves, or a back room, and the copying process moved from shop to home. As Prabhu remarks “every guy could be an agent. Who knows even you could have been one.… the first time, one ordinary guy walks into your shop and asks ‘how can you keep this movie?” So I asked him, “who are you?” He says that he’s from the distributor and he owns that movie and I thought that these guys were playing the fool and I went and complained but looking at it really they were from distributors. Because the movie didn’t do well in the theatres they wanted to extract money from me. they’d start off with about 50000 rupees… and later it goes down… we paid 5000 once, and the second time we paid 3000.” The end of video technology came first with the proliferation of cable networks, and the final blow was delivered by VCD’s in the latter half of the decade. Prabhu states: “see this digital thing is popular. People working in offices they used to come and ask for CD’s when they go for office, because they watch movies there also. It started with computers. They used to ask for movies to play on computers. So that’s how it started. Then the players came out. There were guys who used to sell. Initially we got from this guy called Ganesh. He’s a guy who I know for a very long time. So they started CD’s and we used to get it from there. CD’s mainly come from Malaysia. They come from Malaysia to India whether it’s Hindi or it’s English. Everything comes from there. So it’s supplied all over the market. And it’s interesting you know, because the same companies which had video cassettes are also now into VCD’s.” Hence, many of the networks and practices that emerged with video continue today with VCD’s and DVD’s; manufacturers of video cassettes, are nor makers of cd’s, video libraries are now vcd libraries, ‘piracy’ is even more of a concern. conclusion The era of video is hence characterised by emergent media networks and everyday practices, that remained on the cusp of order and disorder, legality and illegality. These networks and practices constantly disaggregated, and recycled the modernity that video was supposed to usher in. And while the actors in these networks did not have notions of being radicals or of being part of a larger pirate culture, through everyday practices, negotiation, and confrontation, they invariably provided stubborn resistance to the order that this new technology was thought to bring. * By Mayur Suresh. From HYPERLINK "http://www.cscsarchive.org" www.cscsarchive.org, as visited on January 11, 2004. “High Living” The Statesman from HYPERLINK "http://www.cscsarchive.org" www.cscsarchive.org, as visited on January 11, 2004. Zgymunt Bauman, Liquid Modernity, (Polity: London, 2000) as cited in Ravi Sundaram “Uncanny Newtorks: Pirate, Urban, New Globalisation” HYPERLINK "http://www.epw.org.in" www.epw.org.in, as visited on January 5, 2004. Ibid., at 8. Id. Id. Supra n. 18. Restaurant Lee & others v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Others HYPERLINK "javascript:fnCitation('MANU/MP/0032/1983');" MANU/MP/0032/1983 Raghu Krishnan “Biggest Haul of pirated Hollywood Films” (Source: HYPERLINK "http://www.economictimes.com/today/pagehome.htm" www.economictimes.com/today/pagehome.htm, dated: 17/11/1985) from HYPERLINK "http://www.cscsarchive.org.in" www.cscsarchive.org.in, as visited on January 4, 2004. Stephen P. Hughes “Policing Silent Film Exhibition in Colonial South India” AIR 1984 P&H 377. HYPERLINK "javascript:fnCitation('MANU/MP/0032/1983');" MANU/MP/0032/1983 MANU/SC/0355/1993 Michel Foucault Discipline and Punish 218 (Alan Sheridian trans., London: Penguin Books Ltd., 1991). From dev.gangjee at st-catherines.oxford.ac.uk Tue Sep 28 13:14:24 2004 From: dev.gangjee at st-catherines.oxford.ac.uk (Dev Gangjee) Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 08:44:24 +0100 (BST) Subject: [Commons-Law] Culture War article In-Reply-To: <20040923063007.B68A728E959@mail.sarai.net> Message-ID: <20040928074424.82A282A0EC@webmail223.herald.ox.ac.uk> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/commons-law/attachments/20040928/551808db/attachment.pl From songcraft at yahoo.com Tue Sep 28 16:31:34 2004 From: songcraft at yahoo.com (Anthony McCann) Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 04:01:34 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Commons-Law] Culture War article In-Reply-To: <20040928074424.82A282A0EC@webmail223.herald.ox.ac.uk> Message-ID: <20040928110134.74241.qmail@web41303.mail.yahoo.com> I'd love a copy, actually. :) Newbie/Brief intro: specialist in the impact of IP thinking on the social and ethical dynamics of "traditional" communities, enclosure and commons theorist (with the emphasis on enclosure), and lecturer in Ethnomusicology at the University of Sheffield. All the best, Anthony McCann http://www.beyondthecommons.com (PS. website is a little out of date but I will be working on it this week, it has a lot of music and copyright resources in there, in the 'additional resources' section) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/commons-law/attachments/20040928/b8ea4da4/attachment.html From keith at thememorybank.co.uk Tue Sep 28 16:57:25 2004 From: keith at thememorybank.co.uk (Keith Hart) Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 13:27:25 +0200 Subject: [Commons-Law] Culture War article In-Reply-To: <20040928110134.74241.qmail@web41303.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040928110134.74241.qmail@web41303.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41594A9D.4030101@thememorybank.co.uk> Anthony, Dan Hunter's Culture War paper can be downloaded from the URL that Dev gave: http://papers.ssrn.com/paper.taf?abstract_id=586463 and interested readers might also want to see Eben Moglen's The dotCommunist Manifesto to which Hunter pays tribute: http://emoglen.law.columbia.edu/publications/dcm.html Hunter's paper is excellent, whether or not you buy the attempt to update Marxist analysis. It is particularly valuable for depicting the movement associated with Lawrence Lessig as window-dressing for capitalism and th eopen source movement as th rtruly revolutionary path for our day. The fact that Lessig is pilloried by th eright as a Marxist allows Hunter to coin the ironic soubriquet Marxist-Lessigist for those who follow th epatron saint of commons-law. Of course, Lessig is also a force in the Open Source movement, but th ekey is where you stand in the issue of private property. Hunter makes some desultory reference to deveoping countries being screwed by the pharmaceuticals companies and their ilk. He also, interestingly enough, cites two examples where Indians stood up to be counted against the US/EU juggernaut. But he fails to follow through on the global character of the class struggle he identifies and the part that India and China might play in that. He also seems to be entirely wrapped up in the need for self-expression. The issue of livelihood might enter into it for the 4 billion human beings who have not yet solved that problem. I should say that I think Hunter's Marxist approach is valuable. He just need to think more globally. And that could be said of Lessig too. What strikes me about this list is how passive most of the Indian contributors are when it comes to passing on western commentaries. I had hoped for more than that when I joined. Keith Hart www.themeorybank.co.uk From Vaibhav at AnandAndAnand.com Tue Sep 28 18:57:37 2004 From: Vaibhav at AnandAndAnand.com (Vaibhav Vutts) Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 18:57:37 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] update on telecast rights Message-ID: Hello Some more update on the telecast dispute Vaibhav Tuesday September 28, 6:01 PM Supreme Court to hear cricket telecast case Wednesday NEW DELHI (Reuters) - The Supreme Court will continue hearings in a petition by the country's biggest listed media firm against the cancellation of its $308-million contract for television rights to broadcast Indian cricket matches. A five-judge bench of the top court is hearing the dispute that threatens the rights of India's largest listed media firm to telecast four years of home matches. The broadcasts were to have started with the eagerly awaited test series against Australia which starts from October 6. "The hearing will go on for the better part of tomorrow," Harish Salve, the lawyer for Zee TV, told reporters on Tuesday. Rival bidder ESPN Star Sports had begun a case in a lower Bombay court over Zee's eligibility, but the joint venture of media giants Disney and News Corp. withdrew its petition after the Indian board's decision to cancel the Zee deal. The Australian board has threatened to pull out if the series is not broadcast, while the International Cricket Council wants the board to provide television pictures on close decisions to go ahead with the tests. The Indian board has told the Supreme Court it is finalising arrangements to telecast the four-test series on its own and distribute the feed both domestically and abroad. Zee says it should be awarded the television rights as it had won the tender through a transparent bidding process. But the board, which unilaterally cancelled the contract, says its decision cannot be legally challenged because it is a private body which enjoys such rights under the country's constitution. -----Original Message----- From: Rajlakshmi Nesargi [mailto:rajlakshmi_nesargi at yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 4:20 PM To: commons-law at sarai.net Subject: [Commons-Law] update on telecast rights Hi folks, An update on the ongoing litigation in Bombay Highcourt. As usual the pressure tactics.... Best Raji Australia says it may not play with TV blackout OUR CORPORATE BUREAU Mumbai, September 20 The Australian cricket Board has threatened to call off the forthcoming tour to India if the telecast row is not settled. No telecast, no tour, Cricket Australia (CA), the Australian Cricket Board, has told the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI). The Indo-Australian four-test series starting October 6, 2004, is the first game covered under the four-year telecast rights currently in dispute and being fought in the Bombay High Court. BCCI President Jag Mohan Dalmia confirmed the receipt of a letter from the Australian Cricket Board, but refused to divulge details. Talking to Business Standard from Kolkata over telephone, he said, "The letter has been submitted to the Bombay High Court where the case is pending." The Bombay High Court has been hearing the petition filed by ESPN-Star Sports Challenging the BCCI's decision to award the telecast rights to Zee Telefilms for $308 million. Sources close to the development said Cricket Australia (CA) has threatened to pull out of the four-Test series against India next month if the matches were not telecast. They added the CA has asked BCCI to inform the status of the telecast at least a fortnight before the series is slated to begin. Going by the time frame being laid by CA, the BCCI should inform its Australian counter part about the status of the telecast rights latest by tomorrow (Tuesday). The first test is slated to begin at Bangalore on October 6. Meanwhile, the Indian Cricket board today told the Bombay High Court that is has powers to cancel the tender process as well as call for a fresh bid for telecast of cricket matches and indicated that it may do so in case the legal row between ESPN-Star Sports and Zee Telefilms Ltd is not resolved soon. The statement was made by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) counsel KK Venugopal, who said the matter needs to be resolved speedily as ACB has threatened to with draw from the upcoming cricket matches in case the telecast does not take place. The BCCI counsel passed on the message of the ACB and urged the Court that the matter to be resolved expeditiously. However, there is a possibility that even if the court comes out with an early ruling, it will be challenged in higher courts. The counsel also said to the court that the BCCI has powers to cancel the tender process as well as call for a fresh bid for telecast of cricket matches, indicating that the board might go for fresh bid, if needed. The BCCI counsel said the clause 3.2, which deals with the eligibility in terms of experience and production capacity, may be done away with and the new tender would just focus on the highest bid. Sources said the CA's demand for telecast coverage holds ground under the International Cricket Council (ICC) conditions, which make it clear that matches cannot be played without television coverage being made available to the third umpire. They added that the BCCI knew that the issue of telecast rights was a must and therefore began negotiations with another network. The BCCI move was stymied by a court ruling, which precluded it form doing another deal until the main matter was resolved. _____ Do you Yahoo!? vote.yahoo.com - Register online to vote today! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/commons-law/attachments/20040928/316263af/attachment.html From jeebesh at sarai.net Wed Sep 29 12:59:16 2004 From: jeebesh at sarai.net (Jeebesh Bagchi) Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 12:59:16 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Digital Colonial Documents Project (India) Message-ID: <415A644C.8000307@sarai.net> H-ASIA September 28, 2004 Announcing a new resource: Digital Colonial Documents Project (India) (x-post Indology) ************************************************************************ From: Peter Friedlander Dear List Members, You might be intersted in this new resource we are making available The Digital Colonial Documents Project (India) is intended to promote study of the rare seminal documents which were influential in the formation of the notions of nation, state and culture during the colonial period. It includes full text versions of the Indian Census Reports for 1871, 1881, 1891 and 1901, Murrays Guide to India for 1859, The Indian Education Report of 1882, Mill's History of British India and other documents. See http://www.chaf.lib.latrobe.edu.au/dcd/default.htm From jeebesh at sarai.net Wed Sep 29 15:55:40 2004 From: jeebesh at sarai.net (Jeebesh Bagchi) Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 15:55:40 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Culture War article In-Reply-To: <41594A9D.4030101@thememorybank.co.uk> References: <20040928110134.74241.qmail@web41303.mail.yahoo.com> <41594A9D.4030101@thememorybank.co.uk> Message-ID: <415A8DA4.4010202@sarai.net> Thanks Dev for the article. Was cursorily going through the article and was struck by the fact of continuous usage of the term `private property`. I think this is one area any fresh account of Marx need to be little sharp about. Marx's references are to 19th century reality of individual ownership based production enterprises. With the coming of joint stock companies he is very unsure of how to locate them. The dominant reality of 20th C has been towards to making of huge corporate and state structures claiming property rights and with ownership patterns being very diffused and dispersed amidst intricate (gigantic) institutional players. The question of `control over domains of production and circulation` is critical in this phase and it seems that along with military strength, `property` is becoming critical to underpin some certainity within growing uncertainity. We will need to examine earlier conception of property and see how they speak to what we are witnessing in its current forms. This overlooking of the transformation in the `ownership` pattern get further blurred when `nationalist` positions are brought to bear on this debate. A national state may claim `property` rights and yet posture itself as counter-hegemonic or fighting the big, bad and ugly and in reality be destroying many basis of knowledge production and circulation within it's territory. Here a brief look at the enviornmental policies and struggles will be important. And, Kieth, do have a look at Liang's posting on Porous Legality (posted about three months back) and you may see an emergence of a fresh way of engaging with the so called `western` accounts. best jeebesh From keith at thememorybank.co.uk Wed Sep 29 17:38:22 2004 From: keith at thememorybank.co.uk (Keith Hart) Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 14:08:22 +0200 Subject: [Commons-Law] Culture War article In-Reply-To: <415A8DA4.4010202@sarai.net> References: <20040928110134.74241.qmail@web41303.mail.yahoo.com> <41594A9D.4030101@thememorybank.co.uk> <415A8DA4.4010202@sarai.net> Message-ID: <415AA5B6.9050102@thememorybank.co.uk> Jeebesh, I agree that the issue of private property should be viewed historically. We must try to understand how something that was originally a means of defending personal autonomy in the liberal revoluttions of the 17th-18th centuries has become the instrument of corporate global domination in our century. In th eprocess property in things, especially land, has migrated to property in ideas whose reproduction is essentially costless. Marx, as you say, stood at the transition from individual to corporate ownership of capital, although corporations like the East India company had been in business for quite a while. C.B. Macpherson in his introduction to the book he edited, Property: mainstream and critical ideas (1978), argues that the opposite of private property is common property. What makes it private is holding exclusive rights against allcomers. Abstract entities like states and corporations, as well as individuals, can thus hold private property. We are understandably confused by this development, since we imagine that private property belongs to living persons. The law made a clearcut distinction between real and articificial persons; but this distinction collapsed as a result of dubious judicial precedent in the USA in the 1880s, when representatives of the railways companies succeeded is winning the right of corproations to be regarded as a legal person like you and me, minus the liability for bad debts and other hindrances that we still suffer from. I believe, with Dan Hunter, the author of the article in question, that the current regime of intellectual property is a threat to civil society everywhere and especially to a shrinking cultural commons. Our inability hitherto to challenge the corporations effectively has numerous causes -- the law is complex and hard to understand, until recently not many people felt diminished by what was going on. But I argue, in a pamphlet I am now writing called The Hitman's Dilemma ('Don't take this personal, it's just business'), that the confusion of personal agency with the impersonal conditions of its exercise is a disabling feature of political culture and one that needs to be clarified by serious intellectual work. So I am glad that brought up one of th ekey questions raised by Hunter's article. I did not intend to slag off the whole list at the end of my last message, but it just came out that way. My remark was really an extension of the exchange I had with Sanjay about publishing on the net without critical commentary. I read Lawrence Liang's paper before signing up for the list. It is terrific and was a major part of the inducement to do so. I should say that I am still here because of the continuing benefits of membership. Keith From lawrence at altlawforum.org Wed Sep 29 19:21:24 2004 From: lawrence at altlawforum.org (Lawrence Liang) Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 19:21:24 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Culture War Message-ID: Hi Keith I am sending you the conclusion for an article which I had written as an overall survey of the idea of open content licenses ( this will be piblished by Piet Zwart Institute soon), in which I have tried to look at some of the issues that you have raised, both of the roperty question, as well as a critique of the dominant US liberal scholarship, relying on Mauss, Martin hardie, Manuel etc. Since the article is rather long I thought I will just include the conclusion for now, but woud be happy to send the article to whoever wants the full text Lawrence ======================== Not by one path alone: Conclusion and analysis and critique There is an interesting story that Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Zizek narrates of how he hates eating in a Chinese restaurant because it involves everyone sharing and digging into the main course. So a friend suggest that his refusal to share the main course in a Chinese dinner may be symptomatic of his fear of sharing a sexual partner, to which Zizek replies that , on the contrary his refusal to share a sexual partner is perhaps symptomatic of his hatred for sharing a main course in a dinner.[i] <#_edn1> Reading licenses, we are often faced with a similar predicament, where we tend to foreground the license at the cost of seeing the broader changes and social imaginaries that it enables. The open software and open content movement is often read in a narrow technical manner as though the entire question were a legal one, in terms of the validity of the license, the legal innovation etc., forgetting often that beneath the license lies newer modes of organizing modes of production and distribution of knowledge and creativity. One of the attempts of this paper has been to also map out the various open content licenses, and I can think of no metaphor which captures the limitation of such a task, than the metaphor of mapping. The map is always an imprecise distortion, in the same manner that the map does not reveal the hidden secrets of the city, its surprises or its anxieties, the license is not the story of cultural production. The license can and will only remain as an imprecise attempt to capture the complexity of what I actually happening at the level of the new principles through which people are willing to engage in the act of collaborating, creating and sharing. Being framed within the debate on intellectual property and the politics of open v. closed systems of knowledge creation, the question of property is always taken as a given and assumed to be the stable subject matter of copyright as well as copyleft. I would like to use this opportunity to push forward some alternative approaches to looking at the issue of open content licensing. I will attempts to read licenses in two different ways as perhaps offering us an opportunity to move beyond the property and law question, and examine the larger social implication of the open content licensing model. I will also then offer two critiques of the existing discourse on open content/ copyleft, as an insider to the debate. While I greatly admire what is happening in the world o open source/ open content, I would also want to push the debate beyond what I believe is largely US centric approach to the question of the public domain. a. Open Licensing and the repressed memory of Gifts Marcel Maus has opened up a completely new arena of enquiry with his work on the gift, where for the first time, we had a detailed enquiry into a non monetized economy of transactions[ii] <#_edn2> . The gift economy is a particularly fascinating phenomenon marked by complex relationships of reciprocities, and the idea that there is nothing such as a free gift is true, though not in the monetary sense of the term. The giving and taking of a gift sets in chain a complex relationship of reciprocity, where a gift transaction is always incomplete until the person receiving the gift has also given the gift back. While the relationship of reciprocity may be between the gift giver and the gift taker, it is certainly not restricted only to them and the exchange of the gift actually brings into play an economy of circulation, which includes a wider network of participation by members of the community. The gift economy should however not be understood in terms of being locatable only within a historical time space, or restricted to a geographical region but instead be understood as a metaphor for the practices of a wide enrage of communities. One such gift community for instance, is the academic community, which is organized more on the principles of gift giving than on the principles of a monetized community, with research being contributed to the world of knowledge, the researcher being considered as a gifted academic. A gift economy sustains itself on very important social principles and fictions, where they see themselves simultaneously as recipients, givers and carriers of the gift. This is necessarily a fragile community, with the symbolic fiction guaranteeing the social cohesion of the community, and often there is conflict and tension within the community, with fragmentation, differentiation and dissent. While there has been work about open source software as working on the principles of a gift economy, I would like to take the discussion on a slightly different track since my attempt is to offer alternative modes of reading the open content license, I would like to focus on the relationship of the gift to the principles of contract, with the gift as the repressed memory of a pre contract era. Mauss¹s essay has been seen as an initial speculative attempt to trace the origin of the modern contract, but a gift is a contract that deals with anarchistic property. The critical difference between the transaction of a gift and the transaction governed by a contract is the fact that the gift exchange takes place within the realm of being a ³total social phenomenon¹ in which religions, legal, moral, economic and aesthetic institutions appear simultaneously²[iii] <#_edn3> It is only when the transaction is disaggregated from the larger social network, that the form of the modern contract begins to take shape. When disaggregated from the total social phenomenon, the subject of the transaction, either the commodity or property, becomes to take a life of its own and assumes its own rationality. It is only under the condition when the commodity begins to have a rationality divorced from the social context, that the modern contract appears to become intelligible. To become a legal instrument, the contract needs to be based on the foundational principles of justice, since that is the key determinant in the world of legality. What however complicates the story is the fact that we do not necessarily organize our lives only according to the principles of justice, we love, we forget, we forgive, we empathize etc. In other words a range of emotions that do not necessarily base themselves on the rationality of justice or the structured orderliness of Œfairness¹. Hyde for instance says that a modern court of law would be truly perplexed at having to decide a case of ingratitude, ³I gave him a gift but he did not show any reciprocity². [iv] <#_edn4> The modern law of contract does not require any reciprocity for a transaction which does not have the intention to become a contract, and yet in the world of gift giving and gift taking, ingratitude is a very important marker of whether the duties or reciprocities brought about by the gift have been fulfilled. Most critiques of modern law have the danger of romanticizing tradition and converting the entire issue into being one of the conflict between tradition and mdoernity. The discussion on gifts as an alternative mode of looking at transactions and exchanges will therefore seem to some as being grounded in theological niceties. I am certainly not a traditionalist, but following form Peter Fitzpatrick I would in fact argue, that every single tenet of modern law is itself based on its own mythologies, and if you start peeling, then you will uncover some of the theological basis of much of modern law. The easiest mistake that we can make when characterizing something as a gift is to think of it in terms of it being free, or being something that we not have to pay a price for, and that is the logic of the disaggregated commodity that has a life of its own. In gift economies the Œprice¹ is the reciprocity, a reciprocity that was often obtained through word and deed (phrases such as ³I am giving you my word² are still very much in fashion), rather than through any formal instrument, backed by the sovereign authority of law. But as modern law entered more and more into the domain of the heart, it began to secure by law, what was earlier secured by word and deed, and as the strength of the contract increased, one saw a corresponding decrease of the spirit of the gift, till the gift emerged only as something subsumed within the monetized economy, and stood for something that one did not have to pay for. I mentioned earlier that the gift exchange takes place in the realm of anarchist property, it is interesting to go back into principles of anarchism and their relationship to the contract. The anarchists have always believe that the codification of anything is a diminishing of life: this was not merely a class issue for them in terms of the fact that codification of debt and contract serve particular classes but also that such codification results in a separation of the thing, from the spirit of the things. Thus historically one of the first things that any revolution would see would be the burning of official debt records as one of the first steps post the revolution. While this could be seen in terms of a move towards bringing back a certain status quo which erased debts, it can also read as an attempt to preserve the ambiguity and inexactness that makes the gift exchange social: if gratitude is, as Simmell says Œ the moral memory of mankind, then it is a move to refresh a memory dulled by property and contract¹.[v] <#_edn5> I find the metaphor of the gift a useful one as an entry point into understanding the nature of open source/ open content, because the alternative reading of the license has always been through the metaphor of the social contract. Commentators who have attempted to argue that given the uncertainty of the legal status of the GNU GPL, it should be read more as a social contract than as a legal contract. The reason that I find the metaphor of the social contract troubling, is precisely because of the violent history that the social contract is necessarily implicated in. The social contractarians like Locke painted the picture of a pre social world of the state of nature, which was marked by the absence of private property, and consequently the absence of a rule of law which allegedly maintained the security of life. It is however important to remember that the societies that Locke was describing were not merely metaphorical accounts of the west before the social contract, but actually based on living societies in which gift cultures thrived. We have seen in our mapping of the open licenses that there is still an inexactitude which marks them, and my analysis of the licenses are not necessarily based on their legal status in terms of which licenses will necessarily hold up before a court of law. It is difficult to win this battle between one¹s legal pragmatism and one¹s idealism, because the creative commons license clearly mark a quantum leap in terms of the quality of the drafting, their status as legal documents, in other words all the markers of the move towards a more formal and regulated regime which sheds the inexactness and imprecise nature of its predecessor licenses. And yet it is important to read the other licenses as attempting to sustain the memory of giving and gift taking, with all its imperfections intact. b. Fuzzy communities and narrative contracts The second challenge for us while thinking through the idea of the open source or the open content community as sustained through the mythical allegiance to a license, is to understand what exactly is the nature of this community and what is the nature of the contract that binds them. The GNU GPL or the creative commons licenses, while being one the one hand about the licensor in relationship to the general public, and in relation to the work is also at the same time a symbolic commitment to a larger community. The whole point if a general public license that is that it is targeted at a larger community and not aimed only at the monadic individual as in the case for instance of an Œend user¹ license agreement. What exactly then is the nature of this commitment. I will borrow from a very unlikely source to try to characterize the nature of the community that emerges from such licenses, and that is from an Indian historian Sudipta Kaviraj. Kaviraj¹s idea of the narrative contract is a very interesting one, he uses it in the context of providing an account of the emergence of the fiction of India as well as the emergence of the nationalist public. Posing the question of how a fictive community comes into being, which has the ability to transcend its immediate temporal experience to the experience of an abstraction such as the nation, Kaviraj agues that the process entails the movement from the idea of a fuzzy community to an enumerated one. A fuzzy community is always an imprecise community, and lacks the coherence provided the moment you become an a part of an enumerated community (that is you are counted as being Œa citizen of India¹ for instance). This movement from a fuzzy to an enumerated community in the case of nationalism is accomplished by the category of the citizen subject, an omnibus category that worked primarily as a transactional site and a mechanism for all other actions that are we collectively call democracy, in short as precisely the beginning of a narration. Thus the movement for Kaviraj is obtained through the coming into being of a narration, and for him ³the narrative structure sometimes aspires to be a contract; the telling of a story brings into immediate play some story conventions invoking a narrative community. Ordinarily theses are coincident in terms of their frontiers with social communities of some form. To some extent all such communities from the stable to the emergent use narratives as a technique of staging together, redrawing the boundaries or reinforcing them. Participating in a movement includes or involves something like accepting contractual obligations and I suspect some of the affiliation of the individual to movements counteracting a monadic individualism is accomplished by narrative contracts². [vi] <#_edn6> I find the metaphor of the contract in the way that it is used by Kaviraj a very interesting one, it ties us back to the previous section of the gift community, which was also a community that ³involves something like accepting contractual obligations². The narrative contract for Kaviraj serves two purposes, one the one hand it brings the individual into a relationship of some obligation, but it also brings the individual into a network or an imagined community of some form, with which the individual can counteract monadic individualism. While for the purposes of national histories, the site where this narrative contract takes place is the constitution/ nation, how is this useful in our understanding and reading of open content licenses? The open content license also requires the taking up of certain commitments/ obligations on the part of the licensor/ licensee, but more interestingly unlike an end user license agreement, the signing of the open license brings into play a similar kind of narrative contract as well in which one participates in the larger community of like minded people who have also either licensed open content or use open content. The difference however for me is that without the referent of such a monumental fiction such as the nation to sustain this imagined community, it is a community that will always remain in a state of fuzziness, but aspiring or moving towards enumeration, a enumeration which will never be complete, precisely because of the spatial and temporal fluidities that mark this community. It is in fact far more interesting to see this state of fuzziness c. Free as in America In the last two segments I will offer a critique of some strands of the free software /open cultures debate, with special reference to the larger political and economic context in which much of the discourse of freedom is located, namely the United States. In a recent article Martin Hardie [vii] <#_edn7> has provided a scathing critique of the liberal constitutional discourse in which the entire language of the free software movement is based, and the problems with ascribing to this notion and vision of freedom. The word freedom, seen in the context of the invasion on Afghanistan, the freeing of Iraq and the other freedom projects of the United Empire of America Corporation does seem like a rather scary word. As Hardie says ³Floss currently resides within a particularly American vision of freedom which seems to be spreading virus-like in its quest to smooth the space of the globe. With this vision and this tendency, fear and control are sought to be generated with the invoking of images of the enemies of freedom often related to the Œwar on terror'. But these images form only some of the gloss of the spectacle necessitated by this overarching tendency toward global corporate or imperial sovereignty².[viii] <#_edn8> Hardie argues that the usual rhetoric of freedom as it appears in the copyleft movement is configured within the larger constitutional and political rhetoric of freedom as understood in the US. The constitutional vision of freedom itself is predicated on a larger idea of the freedom of property or the freedom of capital, and the use of this idea of freedom is it emanates from within the heart of capital as it were will prove to be a dangerous trend because when freedom of speech is pitted against freedom of property, it is inevitably freedom of property that prevails. He says that ³It appears to me that to pose speech against property in the forums of capital, as the rhetoric of Floss seeks to do, within the context of the rhetoric of American freedom, is to concede the struggle to a form of American constituted power, privileged by capital within the realms of imperial sovereignty. It is more than likely, given the intersections I seek to describe, that it will be property that comes out on top. Even if that means perpetual crisis, and continual management and control of the hackers, pirates, terrorists and other barbarians who seek to escape the bounds of freedom²[ix] <#_edn9> . Using Lessig¹s characterization of the struggle over copyright as a struggle over American values and the future of freedom in America, Hardie proposes that free as in freedom can also be read as free as in America. This notion of freedom runs through the works of most American scholars who are on the public domain side of the copyright debate, situating the conflict as though it were only a matter of the history of the United States, and the use of the language of the commons and public domain is to invoke a universal history, but specifically addressing the problems of the US. The critical scholarship on copyright in the US has taken an automatic turn to the constitution and particularly to the first amendment, or the right to freedom of speech and expression. This is perhaps best illustrated by the Eldred v. Ashcroft case, where the Copyright Extension Term Act was challenged on the grounds that it violated the copyright clause as well as the first amendment in the US constitution. Hardie characterizes this reliance on the constitutional framework, as the domain beyond politics, as a transcendental foundationalism . Locating the larger political dimension of US constitutional history, Hardie cites the works of Negri to show ³How American constituent power, founded upon the frontier, in the end was submitted to the constitution: ³The homo politicus of the revolution must submit to the political machine of the constitution, rather than in the free space of the frontier, the individual is constrained to that of the constitution. ... [I]t is absorbed, appropriated by the constitution, transformed into an element of the constitutional machine. It becomes constitutional machinery. What constituent power undergoes here is an actual change of paradigm ... shifting it away from its meaning as active participation in the government to a negative meaning - that of an action ...under the aegis of the law³.15 It ³is not conceived as something that founds the constitution, but as the fuel of its engine ... no longer an attribute of the people ...(it) has a model of political society.16 The constitution becomes an organism with it own life with the people reduced to a formal element of government ³a modality of organised power³.17 And at the heart of this organised power, ³the constitution is elevated to the kingdom of monetary circulation³, money replaces the frontier, as Negri describes the ³organism by which Hamilton is inspired is that of the Œpowerful abstraction' of money, of its circulation, and of its pulse ... he ... reorganizes power around financial capital³.18 Thus when I speak of ŒFree as in America', I refer to this America constituted on power and confined by ³the transcendental theory of the foundation³, and with it the ³always theological foundations of capital's economy³.[x] <#_edn10> Thus the libertarian vision of Stallman and the constitutional vision of Lessig are both based on and necessarily bound within this constituted freedom in the context of capital. What then does the free software movement mean for people who situate themselves on the margins both of capital as well of empire, and who are struggling against the gigantic machine of the empire. Assuming that there are emancipatory possibilities that arise from the use of free software which in many ways stands in opposition, both real and symbolic to the biggest billboard of global capitalism, Microsoft, what does it mean to participate in the movement, while also recognizing the ideological foundations upon which it is based? Further more when the entire project is so centrally tied to the US constitutional developments, then we need to pay some attention to the nuances in the constitutional history of the US, with respect to conflicts between property and other freedoms. Citing early constitutional developments, Hardie argues that Property has always been ³the fundamental constitutional value, liberty ... the primary constitutional right, and substantive due process ... the instrument for their accomplishment...³46 Allgeyer vs. Louisiana47 (46) summed up the Supreme Court's jurisprudence at the time: ³The liberty mentioned in (the 14th) amendment means not only the right of the citizen to be free from the mere physical restraint of his person ... but the term is deemed to embrace the right of the citizen to be free in the enjoyment of all his faculties; ... and for that purpose to enter into all contracts which maybe proper, necessary and essential to his carrying out to a successful conclusion the purposes above mentioned³. It ³was the last right, that of contract, which the Court came to consider paramount. For Hardie, then the outcome of the Eldred challenge does not come as a surprise, after all the bold move of pitting freedom of speech and expression against freedom of property was always going to be in favour of freedom of property. He cites Justice Ginsburg¹s statement in the decision that : ³As we have explained, Œ[T]he economic philosophy behind the [Copyright] [C]lause ... is the conviction that encouragement of individual effort by personal gain is the best way to advance public welfare through the talents of authors and inventors'. ... Accordingly, Œcopyright law celebrates the profit motive, recognizing that the incentive to profit from the exploitation of copyrights will rebound to the public benefit by resulting in the proliferation of knowledge... The profit motive is the engine that ensures the progress of science'. ... Copyright law serves public ends by providing individuals with an incentive to pursue private ones.[xi] <#_edn11> Hardie concludes by reassessing the idea of free software movement, and instead of posing it as it normally is from within either the libertarian streak or the liberal streak, he argues for a closer examination of the terms under which we can speak of this new emerging community, as well as the ways in which we can reclaim the stories and mythologies that we tell of free software and free content, and the importance of these stories as framing a viable alternative to the free as in freedom language. ³Floss at its heart is another form of community knowledge production; it is a community formed through a language of production that goes beyond the discourses and rhetoric I have tried to describe here, and as is the case with other forms of community knowledge production, its longevity as an alternative to Imperial sovereignty requires more than simple repetition of currently accepted dogma. Autonomous production of knowledge, and the lives of the multiplicity of locals that inhabit this earth will not be ensured by repeating mantras such as ³free as in freedom³. To do so will simply continue us along the merry path of totalizing one vision of the world and imposing it upon the rest. Should we ­ rather than trying to make all forms of community knowledge production conform to this peculiarly American vision of freedom, chanting along the way, ³information just wants to be free³ ­ not recognize that the potential and position of FLOSS is just one of the many manifestations of community knowledge production, a very special one indeed, and thus commence our analysis and discourse from there?[xii] <#_edn12> d. Pirate aesthetics and transformative authorship Finally I would like to extend and add to Hardie¹s critique of the FLOSS debate for its American vision of freedom, by looking at the basis upon which Lessig can justify P2P, file sharing and transformative copying while disavowing the kind of commercial piracy that takes place in Asia or the piracy that feeds of existing work, without making any contributions or that simply reproduces endlessly. The public domain argument in the US is a relatively familiar one, and as best represented by Lessig, it can be summarized as follows: To summaries very briefly, the arguments run like this: Every aspect of what we call the public domain is now proliferated by images, signs, inventions and products which are protected by one form of intellectual property or another. In addition there is an increasing tendency in which domains that were earlier outside the scope of intellectual property protection are also being brought under the rubric of intellectual property right. This expansion of IPR into public life has resulted in a privatization of the public domain itself, where increasingly almost every cultural resource is the subject of protection. There is an argument that there is therefore a shrinkage of the public domain. Scholars like Rosemary Coombe, have consistently argued that the very practice of a political public domain has relied on the ability of various people (consumers) to engage in critical dialogic practices and these practices do not merely take existing signs for what they are but through processes of appropriation, recodification and transformation determine what meaning itself is. If all signs are, therefore, the subject of IPR and entitled to protection, there is a danger that dialogic practices themselves are under threat as the owner of the sign will have the ability to determine the scope of the use of such signs, and that the owners of these signs will have the ability to freeze the meanings of these signs and hence curtail the very possibility of critical dialogue. Through an analysis of various case studies it is then argued that over the years there has been a strong trend towards curtailing any kind of critical practice and that this is a violation of First Amendment rights or the right of freedom of speech and expression[xiii] <#_edn13> . There are therefore two dominant legal arguments that seem to motivate the critical copyright debate amongst US scholars, one is the first amendment and freedom of speech position, and the other is to rely on existing doctrines within copyright law such as the fair use doctrine. The case that would best exemplify the position that most critical scholars in the US would hold is Campbell v. Acuff Rose[xiv] <#_edn14> where the US Supreme court held that parody was a part of the fair use doctrine. In this case 2Live Crew created a parody of Roy Orbison¹s song, Oh pretty woman, and when sued for copyright infringement made claimed a fair use exception. The court reasoned that their rendition of the song had Œtransformative authorship¹, and could be considered an original by itself since it involved creativity, labour etc. The idea that I want to pick on is the idea of transformative authorship, as we can see, that the ghosts of copyright still hovers around even in the culture of the copy. For Lessig and others such a copy is a part of the US tradition, and it entails contrast borrowing and recoding of what exists in the public domain, but is this the only history of the public domain that is available to us? What happens if there isn¹t any transformative authorship, what happens when the copying is literally the churning out of hundreds and hundreds of copies of the latest DVD¹s, do we, the critical scholars of copyright, then turn away our faces in embarrassment at this rampant culture of illegality? Do we then declare that this form of piracy is absolutely unacceptable to us, and there is no argument about this, since it does after all violate existing law? And this is where your location in the conflict over copyright matters. I think it is easy, situated within the confines of the liberal debate in the US to decry commercial piracy that does not involve any transformative authorship. It emerges as the ahistorical embodiment of evil, much like the figure of the bandit in Hindi cinema. But like the bandit in Hindi cinema, piracy in Asian countries (a classification that makes as much sense to me as saying Asian food), may have deep rooted histories, histories that do not have any neat public domains to speak of but instead involve messy histories of exclusions, of elite public domains and pirate aesthetics. My argument is that by looking for transformative authorship you are merely looking at a content problem, and you may not find not find any straight forward accounts of the romantic counter publics appropriating symbols of capital to transform them into sites of struggles (and other similar cultural studies inspired slogans). But yet if you look a little closer at some of the histories of these useless, untransformative acts of piracy, you may still find that it does have things in common with the aspirations of creating a more plural, more diverse public sphere of cultural production and participation. Since bandwidth is still a huge issue in a country like India, I do not understand too much of debate on the social role and function of P2P¹s and file sharing networks, at least not in an experiential sense, and of course one extends ones support and solidarity to them in their struggle against the excesses of copyright, there really is no index that we can map the internet based file sharing and P2p networks in India. We however do find our ways out of the bandwidth problem, and this usually is in the form of the neighborhood pirate who supplies cheap pirated DVD¹s, or the media hot spots that exists in most Indian cities that provide free software (free as in Microsoft) to the vast majority of the population entering the world of technology and media . The pirate therefore appears in many ways as the subterranean other of the hacker, lacking the sexiness of the hacker and the moral higher ground of the FLOSS junkie. But certainly not lacking in a rich history of his own, and in this final segment I will try to provide a very cursory history of the background to understanding media transformations and practices in India. Peter Manuel, an ethnomusicologist provides us with an excellent history of the emergence of new media in India tracing out the cassette revolution that took place from the mid eighties. This revolution, he claims created a new aesthetic of media production and consumption that escapes the totalizing imagination of old media in the form of national television, radio and cinema. According to him, new media challenges the one way, monopolistic, homogenizing tendencies of old media as it tends to be decentralized in ownership, control and consumption patterns and hence offer greater potential for consumer input and interaction. I shall briefly summarize Manuels¹ account of the emergence of cassette culture in India.[xv] <#_edn15> In 1908 the British owned GCI had established its factory in Calcutta and through exclusive distribution agreements, it came to dominate the market in an absolute manner. The monopoly had profound cultural impacts in terms of the local genres and languages which it either appropriated, ignored or reduced into a dialect. The necessity of an all India market to ensure great profits ensured the emergence of an all India aesthetic form in film music. The dominance of the Hindi film music and the monopoly of GCI continued till well past the postcolonial period. The development model adopted by the Nehruvian state emphasized state investment in large scale infrastructure projects like dams, mines, factories while discouraging luxury consumption through high import tariffs. These policies of over taxation, cumbersome licensing inhibited the consumer electronics industry and related industries. Manuel reports that by the late seventies however, large number of immigrant workers to the gulf countries had begun to bring back cassette players into India (These were Japanese two-in ones) and the ubiquitous cassette player soon became a symbol of affluence and object of modern desire. This is also the period that saw the emergence of a nascent market for pirate cassettes of film music, feeding off the growth of cassette players and also contributing to the expansion of the gray market where such Œluxury' items could be purchased by the relatively well off. The liberalization policy of the state in the late seventies designed to stimulate growth, demand, exports and product quality saw a liberalization of many import restrictions. The bourgeoning middle class stimulated the electronic industry and while a few were willing to pay the high import duties on foreign electronic goods, a larger number were content tot buy them off the gray market. Certain significant developments in this period helped to create a mature market for the consumer electronics industry: · Reduction of duties enabled Indian manufacturers to import selected components for local manufacture of cassette players. · New policies encouraged foreign collaborations in the field of consumer electronics including magnetic tape production. · Tape coating became big in India and from the period of 1982 to 1985, record dealers switched to cassettes and by the mid 80's cassettes came to account for 95% of the market. Sales of cassettes went from $1.2 million in 1980 to $12 million in 1986 and $21 million in 1990. Export of Indian made records jumped from 1.65 million rupees in 1983 to 99.75 million in 1987. By the end of the 80's Indian consumers were buying around 2.5 million cassette players. This is also the period that saw the swift decline of GCI- HMV as the dominant/ sole player in the industry and the emergence of a handful of large players and over 500 small music producing companies. In a period of a few years, India had become the world's second largest manufacturers of cassettes marketing 217 million cassettes. This period also saw the decline of the film music as the dominant aesthetic form and its marker dropped from 90% to 40% and a whole new range of forms from devotional music, to local language songs and other kinds of markets began to emerge. This period of tremendous growth is however marked clearly by its troubled relationship with legality, with various practices that often straddled both the worlds of legality and illegality sometimes making it difficult to distinguish one from the other. In its initial boom period, most of the music companies were a part of the informal but well networked sector. They often worked with illegally obtained components to ensure cost effectiveness of their product. These ranged from smuggled goods to indigenously manufactured but unlicensed products, components and magnetic tapes. It in this context that we can evaluate the story of one such maverick entrepreneur who with a combination of dynamic business skills, ruthless tactics and a elastic idea of legality came to shaper the music industry. In 1979 two brother Gulshan and Gopal Arora who ran a fruit juice shop in Delhi, and were also electronic buffs began a small studio where they recorded Gharwali, Punjabi and Bhopjpuri songs. After borrowing money they visited Japan, Hong Kong and Korea to study cassette technology and the industry. They returned to set up a factory in India to produce magnetic tapes, and also started producing cassettes and silicon paper and finally built a complete manufacturing plant where they offer duplication services to the smaller regional cassette producers. By the late eighties T Series emerged as the clear market leader and currently they have a set up with worth over $ 120 million and have diversified into manufacturing video tapes, television, VCD players, MP3 players, washing machines and even detergents. The elastic legality of Gulshan Kumar's world translated itself in the following manner: · Using a provision in the fair use clause of the Indian Copyright Act which allows for version recording, T Series issued thousands of cover versions of GCI's classic film songs, particularly those which HMV itself found to be unfeasible to release. T Series also changed the rues of distribution by moving into neighborhoods shops, grocery shops, paan waalahs, and tea shops to literally convert the cassette into a bazaar product. · T Series was also involved in straight forward copyright infringement in the form of pirate releases of popular hits relying on the loose enforcement of copyright laws. · Illegally obtaining film scores even before the release of the film to ensure that their recordings were the first to hit the market · Buying up and inserting huge amounts of inferior tape into the established brands, which were then resold to discredit the well established names. While one could easily dismiss these practices as unscrupulous, unethical or clearly illegal activities, we also need to keep in mind the overall impact that T Series had on the music industry in India and cassette culture itself. T Series created as new cassette consuming public by focusing on various genres and languages, which were completely ignored by HMV. HMV had promoted Hindi at the cost of many other languages, which it deemed to be unfeasible in economic terms given the scale of their operations. T Series by changing the rules of the game and introducing for the first time the idea of networked production, where it would offer its duplication services to a number of the small players revived smaller traditions of music. Finally the reduction of the price of the cassette by T Series created a mass commodity. Clearly no straightforward account of legality and business ethics can capture the dynamics and the network of interests that fueled the cassette revolution. For instance in an interview with Peter Manuel, one of the employees of T Series stated that " What the people say about our activities in the early years- its is mostly true. But I tell you that back then, the big Ghazal singers would come to us and ask us to market pirate versions of their own cassettes, for their own publicity, since HMV wasn't really able to keep up with the demand". Similarly even major players like HMV in the past dealt with the pirates. For instance when HMV found that it could not met the demands for one of their biggest hits, Maine Pyar Kiya, they are reported to have entered into an agreement with the pirates whereby the pirates would raise their price from Rs. 11 to Rs. 13 and pay HMV half a rupee for every unit that they sold on the condition that HMV did not sue them or raid their businesses. Other producers are also known to have colluded with pirates in production and marketing so that they can minimize their cost, the taxes payable and royalties by hiding the extent of their sales. The role played by piracy in the creation of a market, in the process of creating a lock in period and also in the reduction of price and has been clearly in software industry and film industry. (Similarly the price of VCD's has come down to Rs. 99, even lesser than what the pirated copy used to be Rs. 100). Similarly the free school street phenomenon of Calcutta created a sub cultural consumption of large amounts of sixties rock before these tapes were available in the Indian markets. Without such a niche elite public, it is highly debatable as to whether Magnasound could have emerged in the early nineties as the most important player in the English music industry in India. I would like to conclude this segment with two ironical stories that can then lead us to the contemporary. The first is that after its rather chequered history with copyright law, T Series is now one of the most aggressive enforcers of their copyright in India. The have a battery of professionals, generally retired police officials who monitor copyright and trademark infringement cases. The second story is an extract from Peter Manuel¹s conclusion to the history of cassette cultures in India. After providing us with a fascinating look at the ad hoc world of innovation based on very porous ideas of legality, Manuel speculates on the possible developments in the future where he says " In India a pre recorded CD costs as much as Rs. 250 or twelve times the price of a tape. CD players themselves anywhere between 5000 upwards, which would constitute a fortune for most Indians/. As a result, CD's naturally remain confined to the upper class. For the music producer, the growth of the CD market is seen as a possible weapon against piracy, as the CD's cannot be duplicated (onto other CD's). Ravi Sundaram in a Series of articles [xvi] <#_edn16> has been theorizing the phenomenon of piracy and illegal media cultures in the new media city. According to Ravi Sundaram, this world of non legal medias in a number of south Asian cities, marked by its rather ad hoc innovativeness and its various strategies of survival, is the world of recycled modernity. It exists in the quotidian spaces of the everyday and cannot be understood within the terms of the earlier publics (the nationalist public and the elite public sphere). Fueled by aspirations of upward mobility, it is an account of the claims to modernity made by a class of people, otherwise unaccounted for by the meta narrative of the nationalist project of modernity. These cultures of recycling do not however exhibit any of the characteristic valor or romance of counter publics. Beginning with the audio cassette revolution that we examined and moving rapidly into the worlds of computers and digital entertainment, this world has been based on a dispersed logic of production and consumption, and marked by is preponderant illegality. This rearticulated entry point into the modern is also contemporaneous with the emergence of the global moment and this arrival of the global via media, new forms of labour like call centers, the software industry in India etc replace the earlier configuration of national/ modern with the global modern. While understanding the issue of entry points that one makes into the modern it now becomes critically important for us to recognize that the shifts in registers of imagination that the global brings upon the national/ modern configuration. Is there then no possibility of a dialogue between this messy world of piracy and the liberal constitutional debate on copyright. One should never give up on debate and dialogue, and of course when the debate excludes your own realities from its imagination, you remind the dominant positions of other realities. I do hope that this brief account o piracy in India provides a better social context which should make it more difficult to be able to justify transformative piracies, while decrying commercial piracy. In a country where bandwidth is still a serious issue, it makes little sense to speak of file sharing and P2P networks. While file sharing may be a reality for a small number of people who have access to high broadband, piracy often acts as the unofficial P2P networks distributing technology and content to a large number of people. The idea of transformative authorship that informs much of the critical debate on copyright in the west do not have a clear resonance in many Asian countries, where transformative authorship exists alongside transformations in the political economy of technology. In Fogerty v. Fantasy[xvii] <#_edn17> records, the court made an argument that ideas were like the water in a common well, and it should be readily available for all to use. The metaphor of the well is a striking one because the history of the well in a country like India for instance has been the history of a highly contested space, where access to village wells have been coded in terms of caste. If we understand practices of gaining access to the technological well, can we then begin to contexualise what transformative authorship may mean beyond the western world, where access to the tools of transformation are presumed. The cassette revolution that I used as an illustration demonstrates the larger content implications of a change in access to means of production in media. It would therefore be futile to claim sympathy to transformative authorship and claim intolerance for piracy of software and content. [i] <#_ednref1> Slavoj Zizek, Looking Awry: An introduction to Lacan through popular culture, (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1992) [ii] <#_ednref2> Marcell Maus, The Gift (London: Routledge, 2001 reprint) [iii] <#_ednref3> Lewis Hyde, The Gift: Imagination and the erotic life of property, (London: Vintage, 1999) [iv] <#_ednref4> Ibid. [v] <#_ednref5> Quoted in Lewis Hyde [vi] <#_ednref6> Sudipta Kaviraj, The Imaginary Institution of India, from Partha Chatterjee and Gyanendra Pandey, Eds., Subaltern Studies VII, (New Delhi: OUP, 1993), pp.1-40. [vii] <#_ednref7> Martin Hardie, Floss and Crisis: Foreigner in a free land, Sarai reader 04: Crisis/ Media, (New Delhi: Sarai/CSDS, 2004) [viii] <#_ednref8> Ibid [ix] <#_ednref9> Ibid. [x] <#_ednref10> Ibid. [xi] <#_ednref11> Ginsburg cited in Ibid. [xii] <#_ednref12> Ibid. [xiii] <#_ednref13> Lawrence Liang , Global Commons, Public Space And Contemporary IPR, available at http://212.67.202.188/~wacc01/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=810 [xiv] <#_ednref14> 510 US 569 (1994) [xv] <#_ednref15> See Peter Manuel, Cassette Culture: Popular Music and technology in North India, (New Delhi: Oxford Univ. press, 2001) [xvi] <#_ednref16> See, Ravi Sundaram, Recycling modernity: Pirate electronic cultures in India, Sarai Reader 01: The Public Domain, Ravi Sundaram, Beyond the Nationalist Panopticon: the Experience of Cyberpublics in India, available at http://amsterdam.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9611/msg00018.html, Ravi Sundaram, Electronic Marginality Or, Alternative Cyberfutures in the Third World, http://www.ljudmila.org/nettime/zkp4/08.htm [xvii] <#_ednref17> 510 US 517 (1994) From jeebesh at sarai.net Wed Sep 29 20:53:08 2004 From: jeebesh at sarai.net (Jeebesh Bagchi) Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 20:53:08 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Culture War article In-Reply-To: <415AA5B6.9050102@thememorybank.co.uk> References: <20040928110134.74241.qmail@web41303.mail.yahoo.com> <41594A9D.4030101@thememorybank.co.uk> <415A8DA4.4010202@sarai.net> <415AA5B6.9050102@thememorybank.co.uk> Message-ID: <415AD35C.80507@sarai.net> I just got across a book that makes interesting connection between property laws, emergence of an innovation (barbed wire got a patent in 1874) and political management of space. (a review of the book is enclosed). What the book throws up is a link between - - 1862 Homestead Act (the act gave any american citizen free ownership of 160 acres of public land, on the condition that it be cultivated.), -1887 Dawes Act (which authorised the president of the United States to parcel out the Indian's land without consulting them. each indian family received two hundred acres of reservation land, the rest was set aside for white farmers.) - and the mass production of barbed wire (from 270 tons in 1875 to 135,000 tons in 1901). This account is a fascinating entry point into the making of property and materail culture that build around it. ------------- Kieth, i am not sure if we can use the term `common property` for anything outside ` private property`. I would think that large measure of human society has lived with a complex mechanism of `usage`, `entitlement`, and `shared` resources that the above binary may not be able to capture. Solomon Benjamin's initial work (with Lawrence and Clifton) in Bangalore clearly shows that a very complex tenural system is still in play in landed property and how through land rationalisation projects, these are wiped away. We need to understand these arrangements. Salaam Jeebesh --------------------- http://zmagsite.zmag.org/Mar2003/booktwo0303.html Barbed Wire: A Political History by Olivier Razac; translated by Jonathan Kneight (New York: New Press, 2002;132 pp.) Review by Christopher Capozzola When barbed wire was first introduced in 1876, no one believed that it would work, so a young promoter named John Gates organized a demonstration at the Military Plaza in San Antonio. Gates invited local cattlemen to test their wildest longhorns against his new fencing material, crafted of nothing more than thin wire and metal barbs. The dubious ranchers released their steers, who stumbled backward in confusion after they ran head first into the fences. When they did so, philosopher Olivier Razac would suggest, they ran up against the dawn of the 20th century. Barbed wire’s simplicity masks its ruthless efficiency. Its purpose is not merely to enclose the property of farmers and ranchers for economic gain. Marking off boundaries is also a political act. After barbed wire, some are inside and some are outside; those outside can be—and have been—dehumanized, reduced like the cattle in San Antonio’s city square. Razac begins by tracing the emergence of barbed wire in the 19th century American West. In the vast and treeless reaches of the prairie, stone walls and picket fences were hopelessly impractical. After several attempts, inventors developed the barbed wire that we know today. But the wire that farmers used to domesticate the dry western landscape quickly became a tool for the subjugation of Native American tribes. It put an end to what Razac calls “fundamentally Indian values: open space, nomadism, and egalitarianism.” This then “created the conditions for the physical and cultural disappearance of the Indian.” If the reservations were not literally barbed-wire prisons, that was only because barbed wire had already accomplished its task. Razac then turns from the American West to the Western Front, where the entrenched armies of World War I hunkered down along a 600-mile border strewn with barbed wire. As the opposing forces faced off across No Man’s Land, barbed wire helped them turn a strikingly short physical gap into a profound political distance. French and German soldiers despised each other as beasts, a development Razac chalks up to the divisive effect of barbed wire. At the outset of the war, this “artificial bramble” was impassable for attacking forces; only the emergence of the tank—World War I’s most dehumanizing machine—made military breakthrough possible. This process of dehumanization through boundary-marking reached what Razac considers its logical conclusion in the Nazi concentration camps of World War II. The barbed wire surrounding the camps demarcated human and inhuman, an important step in making genocide not only practically possible but intellectually imaginable. The theoretical implications of barbed wire are not insignificant. Razac shows that barbed wire is not merely an object, but a whole way of seeing the world, “a sublime, even monstrous modern technology run amok.” All this history is true enough, and there is much to justify Razac’s bleak interpretation of the 20th century. But Barbed Wire slights those who have resisted it, either as an object or as a political idea. Barbed wire is easy to construct, but it is also easy to destroy. In the Range Cutting Wars in Texas in 1883, farmers and cowboys who felt their livelihoods threatened by the enclosure of land began surreptitiously cutting the cattlemen’s wires. The radical Greenback Party entered the fray, denouncing barbed wire as a symbol of monopoly, and an all-out war against the rise of corporate agriculture was on. By year’s end, more than half the counties of Texas had reported incidents of wire cutting. Physical and cultural resistance took place on the other side of the fence as well: Razac suggests that “when the Indians could retreat no farther, they died.” But generations of Native Americans have persevered and maintained cultural traditions under hostile conditions. Razac might never be caught dead gambling at Foxwoods, but ever since the 18th century enlightenment, Native Americans have stubbornly refused to succumb to French philosophers’ romantic visions of the “vanishing” Indian. Likewise, in World War I, barbed wire did not always succeed as a tool for the dehumanization of the enemy. Historian Eric Leed has shown that ordinary soldiers in the trenches—who knew what war could do to the citizens of any nation—actively sought to avoid combat whenever possible. He even recounts the tale of a German sergeant who realized in a dream that French soldiers also had wives and children and ordered his men to cease fire. Finally, although it was more rare, there was resistance and escape in the Nazi concentration camps, as Razac relates. Unfortunately, Razac’s bleak interpretation may prove correct in the long run. The final section of Barbed Wire details the complex new technologies of surveillance and political control that have begun to shape the 21st century. Barbed wire will find little use in the future, argues Razac, in part because it is an outdated technology, but mostly because it has taken on the connotations of “an almost universal symbol of oppression.” (Think of your Amnesty International bumper sticker here.) Video surveillance, electronic identity cards, and gated communities are the future that is already here, but just as the reader is ready to write Razac off as a conspiracy theorist, he brings his historical analysis to bear on the present. Residents of gated communities want the latest security technologies, but they won’t buy properties protected with barbed wire. “So it seems,” writes Razac, “that the violence of power is unacceptable only when we see it in action.” Barbed wire will disappear, but what will endure is the mindset of the political boundary, ever more invisible, but ever more powerful. Fifty years ago, the disbelieving interrogator of a gulag survivor asked “if people moved around in [the gulag] as they pleased, how could it have been a camp?” Razac leaves us to wonder whether we are on the inside or the outside of these new invisible boundaries. How would we know? State authorities found it nearly impossible to catch the rebels in the Texas fence wars of the 1880s. All it took to cut the wire was a pair of wire clippers, but the shears were a necessary tool found in the pockets of every cowboy who rode the range. The people of the 21st century will have to be like the cowboys of the 19th, and dig deep into our pockets and our imaginations to figure out how the tools that maintain political power can also be used to transform it. From keith at thememorybank.co.uk Thu Sep 30 02:54:48 2004 From: keith at thememorybank.co.uk (Keith Hart) Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 23:24:48 +0200 Subject: [Commons-Law] Culture War article In-Reply-To: <415AD35C.80507@sarai.net> References: <20040928110134.74241.qmail@web41303.mail.yahoo.com> <41594A9D.4030101@thememorybank.co.uk> <415A8DA4.4010202@sarai.net> <415AA5B6.9050102@thememorybank.co.uk> <415AD35C.80507@sarai.net> Message-ID: <415B2820.4080408@thememorybank.co.uk> Jeebesh, Thanks for the barbed wire book. I didn't say that common property is everything that isn't private property. I said it was its opposite, in contrast to the current opposition between public and private sectors based on ownership criteria. No-one denies that land tenure arrangements especially are often complex (I am an anthropologist by training and was brought up on Sir Henry Maine) or that corporations are very different beasts from you and me. I felt that you were equating private property with ownership by individual persons. Certainly you sought to diminish the relevance of Marx's analysis of private property today by asserting the predominance now of abstract owners such as nation-states and corporate capital. My argument, which is not much different from Hunter's and is simplified for the sake of discussion on a list, is that the scope of exclusive private property rights is being expanded at the expense of common property in our time by the drive of corporate capital to establish monopoly control over resources that previously belonged to us all and to no-one. You can say that property rights are always more complicated, but the political process we face is of cultural complexity being over-ridden by private monopolies demanding rents for what was until recently free. Thus a guy in California had acquired ownership in US law of the commercial use of the term 'indigenous'. This means that any Native American community wishing to establish a casino using that word has to pay him from the privilege. The attempt to monopolise the right of reproducing life forms like genetic code is a more serious example. In the USA, the firm that transcribes and publishes the cases that form the basis for legal precedent is now charging for reproduction of its material which is nothing less than the common law. I don't deny the complex reality of existing cultural forms of property. In many cases they hardly qualify as property since no-one thinks they own them until some corporation figures that they might as well charge the public for their use. I only wanted to point out that this is an extension of private property, not an alternative form in law. How the law of personal property evolved to this point is a problem for us to sort of out and correct. It doesn't help much to harp on about how complicated and different most human arrangements usually are. The main issue raised by Hunter (who is worth being read more than cursorily) is that the main opposition to the corporate takeover has more or less accepted that most things have to be licensed, even if in a more generous way than that envisaged by Microsoft or Monsanto. But for the vast bulk of human history, people have got on fine by borrowing, imitating, copying or just using creatively whatever they encountered in their own and other people's cultures. It is this human conversation that is being hijacked now by private interests organized at a level of abstraction, wealth and power that dwarfs normal human experience of life. They don't even die as quickly as we do. The question of how to curtail this development in the common human interest is urgent. Any theoretical or conceptual approach is only as good as the questions it helps to answer. I hope I have indicated, within the limits of the medium, which question I am concerned about. How did private property evolve from an issue of personal autonomy to th eprinciple of corporate global dominance in the name something called intellectual property rights? I am not sure about yours. Keith From liberation at mweb.co.za Thu Sep 30 03:10:23 2004 From: liberation at mweb.co.za (liberation chabalala) Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 23:40:23 +0200 Subject: [Commons-Law] Re: commons-law Digest, Vol 14, Issue 29 References: <20040929135454.4EA6A28EAA8@mail.sarai.net> Message-ID: <005d01c4a675$b876e2c0$0a1a07c4@co.za> Dear Lawrence I am a lurker on the Commons Law list, and would love to get a copy of the article on open content licences you spoke about today. Thank you! Julian Jonker Writer & Researcher (Independent; University of Cape Town Faculty of Law; District Six Museum Foundation) Cell: +27 (0) 72 129 8530 E-mail: liberation at mweb.co.za jdjonker at ananzi.co.za > > Message: 4 > Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 19:21:24 +0530 > From: Lawrence Liang > Subject: [Commons-Law] Culture War > To: Commons Law > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" > > > > Hi Keith > > > I am sending you the conclusion for an article which I had written as an > overall survey of the idea of open content licenses ( this will be piblished > by Piet Zwart Institute soon), in which I have tried to look at some of the > issues that you have raised, both of the roperty question, as well as a > critique of the dominant US liberal scholarship, relying on Mauss, Martin > hardie, Manuel etc. Since the article is rather long I thought I will just > include the conclusion for now, but woud be happy to send the article to > whoever wants the full text > > > Lawrence > ======================== > Not by one path alone: Conclusion and analysis and critique > > There is an interesting story that Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Zizek > narrates of how he hates eating in a Chinese restaurant because it involves > everyone sharing and digging into the main course. So a friend suggest that > his refusal to share the main course in a Chinese dinner may be symptomatic > of his fear of sharing a sexual partner, to which Zizek replies that , on > the contrary his refusal to share a sexual partner is perhaps symptomatic of > his hatred for sharing a main course in a dinner.[i] <#_edn1> From karim at sarai.net Thu Sep 30 05:01:05 2004 From: karim at sarai.net (Aniruddha Shankar) Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 05:01:05 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Software Patents and Innovation Message-ID: <415B45B9.9080802@sarai.net> Interesting stuff I found on SWPAT I found on Slashdot ... a little digging brought out some material which some of you might not have read so I thought I could post on the List. PricewaterhouseCoopers published a report [1] in August 2004 that was commissioned by the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs in which they have said that "software patents are a particular threat to the European ICT industry" Quote: "There are particular threats to the European ICT industry such as the current discussion on the patent on software. The mild regime of IP protection in the past has led to a very innovative and competitive software industry with low entry barriers. A software patent, which serves to protect inventions of a non-technical nature, could kill the high innovation rate." Here are some direct links [2] to some nice arguments [3] and striking counterarguments "There is NO SUCH THING AS INNOVATIVE SOFTWARE" (and that too from a software professional.[4], [5] Read this with a book called "Innovation and it's Discontents: How Our Broken Patent System is Endangering Innovation and Progress, and What To Do About It" [6] recently published by the Princeton University Press and written by a Professor of Economics at Brandeis and a Professor of Investment Banking at Harvard Business School who argue that the entire patent system is, in general, broken[7]. They trace this breakdown to the 1980s when when a single federal appeals court was established to hear patent lawsuits, replacing 12 regional courts of appeal. This situation was exacerbated when in the early 1990s, Congress changed the patent office's financing, so the agency could pay for itself with user fees. Maybe a listmember across the seven seas who can get access to the book can review it for commons-law ... Shamnad ? Further digging through slashdot threw up some interesting past articles on "innovation". IP Justice, an "international civil liberties organization that promotes balanced intellectual property law in a digital world" put out a white paper [8] on the IP aspects of the FTAA (Free Trade Area of the Americas) Treaty. There's an executive summary in the press release[9]. Here's the slashdot discussion [9]. Reason Online, a " monthly print magazine of 'free minds and free markets.' " discusses[10] a paper[11] written by a pair of economists, Boldrin and Levine, and published by the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis and the reactions to it of several other economists. A snippet from the discussion: 'Moreover, U.S. court decisions in the 1980s that strengthened patent protection for software led to less innovation.' Boldrin and Levine refer to Maskin & Bessin's paper [12] in which they say that "Far from unleashing a flurry of new innovative activity, these stronger property rights ushered in a period of stagnant, if not declining, R&D among those industries and firms that patented most."' Boldrin & Levine go on to say that current IP laws stifle the potential for innovation without intellectual monopoly[13] There's a nice discussion[14] at Slashdot in which there's a provocative thread here [15] Influential right-leaning journal The New Republic published an article a few years back For an inspiring bit of dessert after all that reading, check out [16]... quite nice :) hope this is of interest to some of you :) cheers, Aniruddha "Karim" Shankar P.S. I've heard Praveen calls this list "Communist Law". Made me laugh. [1] http://www.pwc.com/Extweb/pwcpublications.nsf/docid/EC6DE73A846581CE80256EFD002E41FB/$file/pwc_rethinking_european_ict_agenda.pdf [2] http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=122860&cid=10333747 [3] http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=122860&cid=10328048 [4] http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=122860&cid=1032845 [5] http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=123502&cid=10374181 [6] http://pup.princeton.edu/titles/7810.html [7] http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/27/technology/27patent.html?ex=1254024000&en=d5e0c4a58549e133&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland Use commonslaw as the login and lawcommons as the password if you don't have an NYTimes account. [8] http://ipjustice.org/FTAA/IPJ_FTAA_White_Paper_r_1_2.html [9] http://www.ipjustice.org/FTAA/release20031020.shtml [10] http://www.reason.com/0303/fe.dc.creation.shtml [11] http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/papers/ip.ch1.pdf [12] http://www.researchoninnovation.org/patent.pdf [13] http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/papers/ip.ch2.pdf [14] http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/02/22/1837229&tid=155 [15] http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=54756&cid=5361626 [16] http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=123502&cid=10373878 From shamnadbasheer at yahoo.co.in Thu Sep 30 11:38:34 2004 From: shamnadbasheer at yahoo.co.in (Shamnad Basheer) Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 07:08:34 +0100 (BST) Subject: [Commons-Law] Software Patents and Innovation In-Reply-To: <415B45B9.9080802@sarai.net> Message-ID: <20040930060834.3555.qmail@web8407.mail.in.yahoo.com> Dear Karim, Thanks for sharing that with us. Had come across a reference to the book by the Brandeis Prof in the course of my research. Will try and lay my hands on it and review.. Regards-Shamnad --- Aniruddha Shankar wrote: > Interesting stuff I found on SWPAT I found on > Slashdot ... a little > digging brought out some material which some of you > might not have read > so I thought I could post on the List. > > PricewaterhouseCoopers published a report [1] in > August 2004 that was > commissioned by the Dutch Ministry of Economic > Affairs in which they > have said that "software patents are a particular > threat to the European > ICT industry" > > Quote: "There are particular threats to the European > ICT industry such > as the current discussion on the patent on software. > The mild regime of > IP protection in the past has led to a very > innovative and competitive > software industry with low entry barriers. A > software patent, which > serves to protect inventions of a non-technical > nature, could kill the > high innovation rate." > > Here are some direct links [2] to some nice > arguments [3] and striking > counterarguments "There is NO SUCH THING AS > INNOVATIVE SOFTWARE" (and > that too from a software professional.[4], [5] > > Read this with a book called "Innovation and it's > Discontents: How Our > Broken Patent System is Endangering Innovation and > Progress, and What To > Do About It" [6] recently published by the Princeton > University Press > and written by a Professor of Economics at Brandeis > and a Professor of > Investment Banking at Harvard Business School who > argue that the entire > patent system is, in general, broken[7]. They trace > this breakdown to > the 1980s when when a single federal appeals court > was established to > hear patent lawsuits, replacing 12 regional courts > of appeal. This > situation was exacerbated when in the early 1990s, > Congress changed the > patent office's financing, so the agency could pay > for itself with user > fees. > > Maybe a listmember across the seven seas who can get > access to the book > can review it for commons-law ... Shamnad ? > > Further digging through slashdot threw up some > interesting past articles > on "innovation". > > IP Justice, an "international civil liberties > organization that promotes > balanced intellectual property law in a digital > world" put out a white > paper [8] on the IP aspects of the FTAA (Free Trade > Area of the > Americas) Treaty. There's an executive summary in > the press release[9]. > Here's the slashdot discussion [9]. > > Reason Online, a " monthly print magazine of 'free > minds and free > markets.' " discusses[10] a paper[11] written by a > pair of economists, > Boldrin and Levine, and published by the Federal > Reserve Bank of > Minneapolis and the reactions to it of several other > economists. > > A snippet from the discussion: 'Moreover, U.S. > court decisions in the > 1980s that strengthened patent protection for > software led to less > innovation.' Boldrin and Levine refer to Maskin & > Bessin's paper [12] in > which they say that "Far from unleashing a flurry of > new innovative > activity, these stronger property rights ushered in > a period of > stagnant, if not declining, R&D among those > industries and firms that > patented most."' > > Boldrin & Levine go on to say that current IP laws > stifle the potential > for innovation without intellectual monopoly[13] > > There's a nice discussion[14] at Slashdot in which > there's a provocative > thread here [15] > > Influential right-leaning journal The New Republic > published an article > a few years back > > > For an inspiring bit of dessert after all that > reading, check out > [16]... quite nice :) > > hope this is of interest to some of you :) > > cheers, > > Aniruddha "Karim" Shankar > > P.S. I've heard Praveen calls this list "Communist > Law". Made me laugh. > > > [1] > http://www.pwc.com/Extweb/pwcpublications.nsf/docid/EC6DE73A846581CE80256EFD002E41FB/$file/pwc_rethinking_european_ict_agenda.pdf > [2] > http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=122860&cid=10333747 > [3] > http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=122860&cid=10328048 > [4] > http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=122860&cid=1032845 > [5] > http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=123502&cid=10374181 > [6] http://pup.princeton.edu/titles/7810.html > [7] > http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/27/technology/27patent.html?ex=1254024000&en=d5e0c4a58549e133&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland > > Use commonslaw as the login and lawcommons as the > password if you don't > have an NYTimes account. > [8] > http://ipjustice.org/FTAA/IPJ_FTAA_White_Paper_r_1_2.html > [9] > http://www.ipjustice.org/FTAA/release20031020.shtml > [10] http://www.reason.com/0303/fe.dc.creation.shtml > [11] http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/papers/ip.ch1.pdf > [12] http://www.researchoninnovation.org/patent.pdf > [13] http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/papers/ip.ch2.pdf > [14] > http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/02/22/1837229&tid=155 > [15] > http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=54756&cid=5361626 > [16] > http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=123502&cid=10373878 > _______________________________________________ > commons-law mailing list > commons-law at sarai.net > https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/commons-law > ________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your life partner online Go to: http://yahoo.shaadi.com/india-matrimony From songcraft at yahoo.com Thu Sep 30 18:30:17 2004 From: songcraft at yahoo.com (Anthony McCann) Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 06:00:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Commons-Law] Beyond the Commons Weblog In-Reply-To: <415B45B9.9080802@sarai.net> Message-ID: <20040930130017.82160.qmail@web41306.mail.yahoo.com> Hello, Just a note to let you know that the Beyond the Commons weblog is back up and running, covering news, conference calls, and information on music and copyright issues, ethnomusicology, Irish studies, cultural studies, postcolonial studies, anthropology, sociology, and the theme of enclosure and the commons. http://www.beyondthecommons.com/weblog.html All the best, Anthony McCann -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/commons-law/attachments/20040930/2303e93b/attachment.html From hardie at euskalnet.net Thu Sep 30 13:40:36 2004 From: hardie at euskalnet.net (martin hardie) Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 10:10:36 +0200 Subject: [Commons-Law] (no subject) Message-ID: <200409301010.36278.hardie@euskalnet.net> subscribe -- :::::::::::::::::: http://auskadi.tk + 34 665757391 + 34 944668670 :::::::::::::::::: From hardie at euskalnet.net Thu Sep 30 13:40:36 2004 From: hardie at euskalnet.net (martin hardie) Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 10:10:36 +0200 Subject: [Commons-Law] (no subject) Message-ID: <200409301010.36278.hardie@euskalnet.net> subscribe -- :::::::::::::::::: http://auskadi.tk + 34 665757391 + 34 944668670 ::::::::::::::::::