From lawrence at altlawforum.org Wed Nov 1 01:53:53 2006 From: lawrence at altlawforum.org (Lawrence Liang) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 01:53:53 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Kafka and the Delirium of Intellectual Property Message-ID: Kafka, the patron saint of delirium undoubtedly served as the inspiration of Deleuze and Guattari, when they characterized capitalism as a very special delirium. They in turn repaid their debt, by re reading Kafka against the usual grain which portrays Kafka as the existential self loathing neurotic. They would argue that we have never given enough due to delirium, which lies at the heart of desire. Sebastian Luetgert recently pointed me out to an absolutely fascinating diary entry by Kafka that enables us to think through the idea of the delirium of intellectual property. The entry brilliantly combines The Trial and myriad tales of plagiarism to produce an uncanny parable of property and personhood. Lawrence =========== Franz Kafka, Diary Entry 28 February, 1912 Sunday morning, while washing, it occurs to him that he hadn't seen the Tagblatt yet. He opens it by chance just at the first page of the magazine section. The title of the first essay, ³The Child as Creator,² strikes him. He reads the first few lines‹and begins to cry with joy. It is his essay, word for word his essay. So for the first time he is in print, he runs to his mother and tells her. What joy! The old woman, she has diabetes and is divorced from his father, who, by the way, is in the right, is so proud. One son is already a virtuoso, now the other is becoming an author! After the first excitement he thinks the matter over. How did the essay get into the paper? Without his consent? Without the name of the author? Without his being paid a fee? This is really a breach of faith, a fraud. This Mrs. Durège is really a devil. And women have no souls, says Mohammed (often repeated). It's really easy to see how the plagiarism came about. Here was a beautiful essay, it's not easy to come across one like it. So Mrs. D. therefore went to the Tagblatt, sat down with one of the editors, both of them overjoyed, and now they begin to rewrite it. Of course, it had to be rewritten, for in the first place the plagiarism should not be obvious at first sight and in the second place the thirty-two-page essay was too long for the paper. In reply to my question whether he would not show me passages which correspond, because that would interest me especially and because only then could I advise him what to do, he begins to read his essay, turns to another passage, leafs through it without finding anything, and finally says that everything was copied. Here, for instance, the paper says: The soul of the child is an unwritten page, and ³unwritten page² occurs in his essay too. Or the expression ³surnamed² is copied too, because how else could they hit upon ³surnamed.² But he can't compare individual passages. Of course, everything was copied, but in a disguised way, in a different sequence, abridged, and with small, foreign interpolations. I read aloud a few of the more striking passages from the paper. Is that in the essay? No. This? No. This? No. Yes, but these are just the interpolated passages. In its spirit, the whole thing, the whole thing, is copied. But proving it, I am afraid, will be difficult. He'll prove it, all right, with the help of a clever lawyer, that's what lawyers are for, after all. (He looks forward to this proof as an entirely new task, completely separate from this affair, and is proud of his confidence that he will be able to accomplish it.) That it is his essay, moreover, can be seen from the very fact that it was printed within two days. Usually it takes six weeks at the very least before a piece that is accepted is printed. But here speed was necessary, of course, so that he would not be able to interfere. That's why two days were enough. Besides, the newspaper essay is called ³The Child as Creator.² That clearly refers to him, and besides, it is sarcasm. By ³child² they really mean him, because he used to be regarded as a ³child,² as ³dumb² (he really was so only during his military service, he served a year and a half), and they now mean to say with this title that he, a child, had accomplished something as good as this essay, that he had therefore proved himself as a creator, but at the same time remained dumb and a child in that he let himself be cheated like this. The child who is referred to in the original essay is a cousin from the country who is at present living with his mother. But the plagiarism is proved especially convincingly by a circumstance which he hit upon only after a considerable amount of deliberation: ³The Child as Creator² is on the first page of the magazine section, but on the third there is a little story by a certain ³Feldstein² woman. The name is obviously a pseudonym. Now one needn't read all of this story, a glance at the first few lines is enough to show one immediately that this is an unashamed imitation of Lagerlöf. The whole story makes it even clearer. What does this mean? This means that this Feldstein or whatever her name is, is the Durège woman's tool, that she read the Gutsgeschichte, brought by him to the Durège woman, at her house, that in writing this story she made use of what she had read, and that therefore both women are exploiting him, one on the first page of the magazine section, the other on the third page. Naturally anyone can read and imitate Lagerlöf on his own initiative, but in this cast, after all, his influence is too apparent. (He keeps waving the page back and forth.) Monday noon, right after the bank closed, he naturally went to see Mrs. Durège. She opens her door only a crack, she is very nervous: ³But, Mr. Reichmann, why have you come at noon? My husband is asleep. I can't let you in now²‹³Mrs. Durège you must let me in by all means. It's about an important matter.² She sees I am in earnest and lets me come in. Her husband, of course, was definitely not at home. In the next room I see my manuscript on the table and this immediately starts me winking. ³Mrs. Durège, what have you done with my manuscript. Without my consent you gave it to the Tagblatt. How much did they pay you?² She trembles, she knows nothing, has no idea how it could have got into the paper. ³J¹accuse, Mrs. Durège,² I said, half jokingly, but still in such a way that she sees what I really mean, and I keep repeating this ³J¹accuse, Mrs. Durège² all the time I am there so that she can take note of it, and when I go I even say it several times at the door. Indeed, I understand her nervousness well. If I make it public or sue her, her position would really be impossible, she would have to leave the Women's Progress, etc. >From her house I go straight to the office of the Tagblatt and have the editor, Löw, fetched. He comes out quite pale, naturally, is hardly able to walk. Nevertheless I do not want to begin with my business at once and I want to test him first too. So I ask him: ³Mr. Löw, are you a Zionist?² (For I know he used to be a Zionist.) ³No,² he says. I know enough, he must be acting a part in front of me. Now I ask about the essay. Once more incoherent talk. He knows nothing, has nothing to do with the magazine section, will, if I wish, get the editor who is in charge of it. ³Mr. Wittmann, come here,² he calls, and is happy that he can leave. Wittmann comes, also very pale. I ask: ³Are you the editor of the magazine section?² He: ³Yes.² I just say, ³J¹accuse,² and leave. In the bank I immediately telephone Bohemia. I want to give them the story for publication. But I can't get a good connection. Do you know why? The office of the Tagblatt is pretty close to the telephone exchange, so from the Tagblatt it's easy for them to control the connections as they please, to hold them up or put them through. And as a matter of fact, I keep hearing indistinct whispering voices on the telephone, obviously the editors of the Tagblatt. They have, of course, a good deal of interest in not letting this call go through. Then I hear (naturally very indistinctly) some of them persuading the operator not to put the call through, while others are already connected with Bohemia and are trying to keep them from listening to my story. ³Operator,² I shout into the telephone, ³if you don't put this call through at once, I'll complain to the management.² My colleagues all around me in the bank laugh when they hear me talking to the telephone operator so violently. Finally I get my party. ³Let me talk to Editor Kisch. I have an extremely important piece of news for Bohemia. If you don't take it, I'll give it to another paper at once. It's high time.² But since Kisch is not there I hang up without revealing anything. In the evening I go to the office of Bohemia and get the editor, Kisch, called out. I tell him the story but he doesn't want to publish it. Bohemia, he says, can't do anything like that, it would cause a scandal and we can't risk it because we're dependent. Hand it over to a lawyer, that would be best. On my way from the Bohemia office I met you and so I am asking your advice. ³I advise you to settle the matter in a friendly way.² ³Indeed, I was thinking myself that would be best. She's a woman, after all. Women have no souls, says Mohammed, with good reason. To forgive would be more humane, too, more Goethe-like.² ³Certainly. And then you wouldn't have to give up the recitation evening, either, which would otherwise be lost, after all.² ³But what should I do now?² ³Go to them tomorrow and say that this one time you are willing to assume it was unconscious influence.² ³That's very good. That's just what I'll do.² ³But because of this you needn't give up your revenge, either. Simply have the essay published somewhere else and then send it to Mrs. Durège with a nice dedication.² ³That will be the best punishment. I'll have it published in the Deutsces Abendblatt. They'll take it; I'm not worried about that. I'll just not ask for any payment.² Then we speak about his talent as an actor, I am of the opinion that he should really have training. ³Yes, you're right about that. But where? Do you perhaps know where it can be studied?² I say: ³That's difficult. I really don't know.² He: ³That doesn't really matter. I'll ask Kisch. He's a journalist and has a lot of connections. He'll be able to give me good advice. I'll just telephone him, spare him and myself the trip, and get all the information.² ³And about Mrs. Durège, you'll do what I advised you to?² ³Yes, but I forgot; what did you advise me to do?² I repeat my advice. ³Good, that's what I'll do.² He turns into the Café Corso, I go home, having experienced how refreshing it is to speak with a perfect fool. I hardly laughed, but was just thoroughly awakened. From sunil at mahiti.org Fri Nov 3 00:37:47 2006 From: sunil at mahiti.org (Sunil Abraham) Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2006 00:37:47 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Asia Source II: Call for Applications Message-ID: <1162494467.18481.64.camel@localhost.localdomain> Dear Friends, This is a call for applications for Asia Source II: Free and Open Source Technologies for NGOs [Non Government Organisations] and SMEs [Small and Medium Enterprises] from 22nd to 30th of January 2007 in Indonesia. The organisers are International Open Source Network, Tactical Technology Collective, InWEnt, ICT Watch and Aspiration Tech. Supporters include Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development of Germany, Humanist Institute for Cooperation with Developing Countries, Asia Pacific Development Information Network - United Nations Development Network and International Development Research Centre, Canada Please see: http://www.iosn.net/regional/asiasource-2007 for more details. DATES Asia Source II is an 8 day long event from 22nd to 30th of January 2007, to be held in Sukabumi about 3 hours drive from Jakarta in Indonesia. If you would like to participate, you will need to attend the entire event, which means arriving in Jakarta on or before 21st of January and leaving on or after 31 January 2007. WHO SHOULD ATTEND This is an event for experienced professionals actively working with the NGO or SME sector in South Asia and South East Asia, with a history of working with service and advocacy NGOs, educational organisations, NGO resource centres, community centres, health information organisations, SMEs and SME support agencies in South Asia and South East Asia. Like previous source camps, there will be an equal proportion of technical and non-technical people at the event as we are hope to introduce “those who know technology” to “those who need technology”. Towards this end, sessions will vary from the highly technical to completely non-technical. To be eligible to attend, you will need to answer the questions below, providing detailed information about projects you have worked on. The application deadline is 30th of November. We are interested in all kinds of NGO and SME technical experience, but areas of particular focus will include the following: * TRACK ONE: Open Publishing and Broadcasting: Communication Strategies and Writing Effectively. Graphic Design, Web Tools [Content Management Systems, Blogs, Wikis] and Audio/Video Production and Streaming. Script Writing and Story Boarding. File Formats and Conversion Utilities. Shooting and Editing Methodologies. Who should attend: Campaigners, Content Developers, Web Masters, Activists, Fundraisers, Graphic Designers, Film Makers, Radio Professionals, New Media Practitioners and Archivists. * TRACK TWO: Alternative Hardware and Access: Refurbished Hardware, Thin Clients, Hardware Hacking, Wireless Solutions and Community Radio. Who should attend: Server Administrators, Network Administrators, Trainers, E-Riders, Rural Community Organisers, Relief Workers, Privacy Activists and ICT4D Professionals. * TRACK THREE: FOSS Implementation and Migration: Moving an NGO or SME from proprietary software to FOSS. Participatory Design and Planning, Evaluating FOSS, End-User Training and Support Techniques, Dealing with Desktops, Proxy Server, Firewall, Mail Server and Groupware. Change management and migration strategies. Who should attend: Server Administrators, Network Administrators, Trainers, E-Riders, ICT4D Professionals and Software Developers * TRACK FOUR: Information Management: Mapping Information Sources and Requirements. Best practices for Creating Specifications, Information Architecture and User Interface Design. Web-based Databases, Geographical Information Systems, Customer Relationship Management, Application/Communication Security and Disaster Management Systems. Who should attend: Heads of Organisations, Senior Management, Campaigners, Activists, Fundraisers, Archivists, Community Organisers, Environmentalists, Relief Workers and Health Workers. Demonstrating that you have worked on projects in one or more of the above areas will make your application stronger. Proven training experience and an outline of how you will share the acquired skills after "Asia Source II" will also be an asset. All participants at Asia Source II are required to be proficient desktop users of computers, have been involved in at least one NGO or SME project before and to have an existing awareness of the concept of Free and Open Source Software. Applications from women are highly encouraged by the event organisers. FEES AND SUBSIDIES Participants will arrange for their own travel to Jakarta. Once there, transport to the venue from the airport in Jakarta will be provided. All meals and accommodation during the meeting will be provided, for the modest participation fee of 75 USD. There are a limited number of participation fee subsidies available to cover this 75 USD for those who are not able to raise the funds. International travel subsidies are also available for participants who would not otherwise be able to attend the meeting. Please apply as soon as possible for subsidies as there availability is limited. As we have limited space and funds, we cannot accept all participant applications and cannot reimburse the expenses for all of them. Between the 5th and 20th of December we will personally inform each applicant by email if we are able to invite him/her and in some cases reimburse expenses. Please send the completed application form in plain text format to asiasource2 at apdip.net The deadline for sending your completed application form is 30 November. Please refer below for the format of the application form. We will confirm receipt of the application immediately and will ask you to check and reserve (if you do not have to make any advance payment) your flight to Jakarta. BACKGROUND In January 2005, we organised a Source event - an eight day technology camp - called "Asia Source" for 60 participants from the voluntary sector and 60 information technologists from 20 countries from South Asia and South East Asia in partnership with Tactical Technology Collective[TTC] and Mahiti, supported by Hivos, Open Society Institute. This camp was one in a series of international camps on the use of free and open source software being organised by TTC across the developing world. See: http://www.tacticaltech.org/asiasource and http://replication.tacticaltech.org ORGANISERS * International Open Source Network, www.iosn.net, Thailand * Tactical Technology Collective, tacticaltech.org, Netherlands * InWEnt - Internationale Weiterbildung und Entwicklung gGmbH (Capacity Building International), www.inwent.org, Germany * ICT Watch, www.ictwatch.com, Indonesia * Aspiration Tech, www.aspirationtech.org USA SUPPORTERS * Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development of Germany (BMZ), www.bmz.de/en/ through InWEnt * Hivos - Humanistisch Instituut voor Ontwikkelingssamenwerking (Humanist Institute for Cooperation with Developing Countries), www.hivos.nl, Indonesia * Asia Pacific Development Information Network - United Nations Development Network, www.apdip.net Thailand * IDRC – International Development Research Centre, www.idrc.ca Canada APPLICATION FORM Please answer the following questions. You do not need to write long responses, but please provide us with enough information to understand your skills and interests, and to have a sense of why you want to attend Asia Source II and how you can contribute to the event. Please provide answers to all the following questions. 1) Basic personal information: a. Name: b. Gender: c. Date of Birth: d. Nationality: e. Country where you live and work now: f. Affiliation/organisation: g. E-mail address: h. Telephone and emergency contact number(s): i. Anything else we should know about you (allergies, diet, medical condition, special needs): 2) What is your experience of working with NGOs and SMEs. What kinds of projects and initiatives have you worked on? 3) Have you been involved with any technology projects for NGOs or SMEs? If so please briefly explain them. 4) Where are you from, where do you live now, and what is your current professional affiliation (organisation you work for, mission of the organisation, position you have in the organisation, is your organisation an SME or a NGO, etc.)? 5) Which track would you choose to be part of? Please select: TRACK ONE: Open Publishing and Broadcasting TRACK TWO: Alternative Hardware and Access TRACK THREE: FOSS Implementation and Migration TRACK FOUR: Information Management 6) How would you classify yourself, i.e. NGO, SME, women’s rights, localisation, technical, software developer, hardware developer etc.? 7) Please describe your current technical expertise and ability. 8) Why are you interested in attending Asia Source II; what do you hope to learn? 9) Asia Source II participants are encouraged to teach as well as to learn. What tutorials, development sessions or discussions would you like to lead (or help lead)? 10) Are you able/willing to share the acquired skills in your work environment after "Asia Source II"? If yes, how and how many people do you plan to reach? 11) Will you need to receive a participation fee subsidy in order to attend Asia Source II? If so, please explain why. 12) Will you need to receive a travel subsidy in order to attend Asia Source II? If so, please explain why and estimate how much (in US$) your round-trip travel to Jakarta will cost. Applications that will omit any of the questions will not be reviewed. Last Day for Applications 25 November 2006 -- Sunil Abraham, sunil at mahiti.org http://www.mahiti.org "Vijay Kiran" IInd Floor, 314/1, 7th Cross, Domlur Bangalore - 560 071 Karnataka, INDIA Ph/Fax: +91 80 51150580. Mob: (91) 9342201521 UK: (44) 02000000259 From vinay at nls.ac.in Sat Nov 4 11:40:15 2006 From: vinay at nls.ac.in (Vinay Aravind) Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2006 11:40:15 +0530 (IST) Subject: [Commons-Law] Microsoft, Novell reach agreement on Linux-source Message-ID: <58547.59.94.109.43.1162620615.squirrel@59.94.109.43> interesting news! could it be that those fine folks at Microsoft are finally seeing sense? is this really going to work? I don't see how this makes sense for MS though...unless they are shifting their focus from strangling the OS market to strangling the applications market...which anyways is going to go online in the medium-term...at which time who knows who will rule the market... Originally available at: http://today.reuters.com/news/articleinvesting.aspx?view=CN&storyID=2006-11-02T205621Z_01_N02410271_RTRIDST_0_TECH-MICROSOFT-NOVELL-UPDATE-2.XML&rpc=66&type=qcna SEATTLE, Nov 2 (Reuters) - Microsoft Corp. (MSFT.O: Quote, Profile, Research) and Novell Inc. (NOVL.O: Quote, Profile, Research) plan to enter into an agreement that would allow open-source Linux software to work with Microsoft's Windows software, a source close to the situation said on Thursday. The agreement marks a change of course for Microsoft, which has spent years trying to defeat open-source software. The growing popularity of Linux servers has increased Microsoft's customer's needs for the two technologies to work together. The source said on condition of anonymity that Microsoft planned to announce the collaboration on Thursday at a news conference attended by Microsoft Chief Executive Steve Ballmer and Novell CEO Ron Hovsepian. Unlike proprietary software, open-source software lets developers share code and add functions. Users pay for custom features, maintenance and technical support. Linux is the most popular variant of open-source software. An earlier report in the online Wall Street Journal that Microsoft would support Novell's Linux product sent Novell shares up 19 percent, while open-source rival Red Hat Inc. (RHAT.O: Quote, Profile, Research) shares fell 2 percent. "Linux has grown up," said Katherine Egbert, an analyst with Jefferies & Co. who covers Red Hat and Novell. "By jumping into Linux providing support and technology that makes Linux work on Windows and vice versa, that shows that Linux is a mainstream market." Novell and Microsoft plan to work together to develop technologies to allow users to run both Windows and Suse Linux, a version of the operating system sold by Novell, the source said. The two companies, once bitter rivals, plan to also provide patent coverage for each other's customers for their respective products, the source said. More than a decade ago, Novell assembled the pieces of a full-scale Microsoft competitor by buying database software from Borland and WordPerfect, an alternative to Microsoft Word. It bought rights to a rival to Microsoft's Disk Operating System (DOS) and a version of Unix, a predecessor to Linux, seeking to fuse them with Novell's own operating system. But the strategy failed amid surging demand for Microsoft's Windows operating system, leading Novell to file an antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft. Two years ago Microsoft paid $536 million to Novell to settle part of those claims. Shares of Novell rose 17.55 percent, or $1.03, to $6.90, while Red Hat shares fell 2 percent, or 33 cents, to $16.16 in Thursday afternoon Nasdaq trade. Microsoft shares fell 7 cents to $26.74. (Additional reporting by Jim Finkle in Boston, Michael Kahn and Eric Auchard in San Francisco) © Reuters 2006. All Rights Reserved. From seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org Sun Nov 5 07:27:53 2006 From: seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org (Seth Johnson) Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2006 20:57:53 -0500 Subject: [Commons-Law] arstechnica: "UK report: knowledge should be publicgood first, private right second" Message-ID: <454D4521.37C8537F@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> See article below. Comments: The representation of the American model is false -- it's a representation of the bogus version that's been promulgated by the arrogant interests and public servants that we've been living with since about the time computer technology became ubiquitous in the 1980's (I'm speaking about exclusive rights policy in particular here). In literal legal language terms "fair use" is not an exception to copyright -- the copyright statute enumerates the authors' rights as "subject to" the various provisions such as first sale, fair use, etc., not the other way around. And the American tradition is much more true to the unavoidable freeness of published information; this has always been expressed in the fact/idea - expression dichotomy. The American tradition does not actually see knowledge as property and not as a social good as this article says; the American *system* may be treating it that way of late, but our tradition does not -- we've been in the sway of a lot of people who've freaked out about the implications of ubiquitous computing, code and connectivity and have been pushing their weight around, starting perhaps with Bayh-Dole in academia, and the DMCA everywhere else -- as the US implementation of the WIPO freakout that occurred right after the U.S. Feist Publications Supreme Court finding (We are finally seeing some of that reactionary WIPO activity staved off as a real constituency pulls together to stop the broadcaster's treaty). This report is simply expressing commonplaces that we used to always hear, chiefly from academia and the librarian and broader scientific communities, because they are self-evident, but sometimes need repeating by those for whom their ineluctable truth is their stock in trade -- but academia stopped being on the side of academics in this area once Bayh-Dole passed. Before then, you hardly ever heard the term "intellectual property" used in America without scare quotes -- because the things this article mentions were just obvious, almost not worth mentioning except as the corrective that their bare mentioning would serve as. This misconception, which accords an undue mien of veracity to the whole "copyright maximalist" trend, informs their categorization of four models, which is just their way of creating a bogus continuum, just so they can present their concept of "public resource first, private asset second" as a position in the middle. When in fact, the only way to really articulate this idea that knowledge is a public resource first and a private asset second, would be to stop screwing with the tradition and recognize the fact/expression dichotomy, on which basis alone you can even start to have any hope of thinking of such a "model." Look up and read Feist Publications if you haven't already. The notion of moving gradually from the imputed UK/"knowledge as asset first, public resource second" model, to the report's "public resource first, asset second" is ably refuted there. Let alone the imputed US/"knowledge is solely an asset" model. Why on earth have we had to go through all this? Well, for one thing, we've been bought out for a long time, in all four estates. Hopefully we're building enough apparatus these days to stand against it. Seth --- > http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20061102-8133.html UK report: knowledge should be public good first, private right second 11/2/2006 9:36:09 AM, by Nate Anderson The UK is awaiting the release of a report by the Gowers Review of Intellectual Property, a task force charged with suggesting changes to the country's intellectual property laws. The formation of the commission has inspired a flurry of private books and reports on IP designed to influence debate on the subject. While many of these are exactly as interesting as you'd expect, a new report from the Institute for Public Policy Research offers a fascinating look at the reasons behind intellectual property rights and suggests a new way forward for Britain: thinking about knowledge as a public resource first, and a private asset second. Is this idealistic, anti-business pinko blue-skying? The group says no. The two functions of knowledge The report, which was funded by the BBC, the British Library, and the UK Film Council, is an attempt to get beyond the rhetoric of IP maximalists who always want more protection and longer copyright terms and free culture radicals who want to "share information with impunity." Recognizing the legitimate private rights that must be granted to business in order to encourage investment and creative production, the authors of the report also make a strong case for "creating as strong a political voice for public domain as currently exists for other interests." Only when consumers (and the businesses that rely on public domain work) have a real seat at the table can the concerns of each group be properly balanced. The report opens with an observation: knowledge can play two very different roles in society. It can be a commodity that is bought, sold, and protected by copyright, but it can also serve as "social glue" that gives a society a sense of cohesion. "It is through the sharing of information that we are able to develop our intellectual and creative talents, discover new artists, create new businesses, forge alliances between academic and commercial institutions, and learn from one another," says the report, and argues that both uses—not just the business case for copyrights—need to be considered by the government. Four models The study details four models which balance these competing interests in different ways. First, there's the American model, where knowledge is understood solely as an asset. Some fair use, parody, and public domain rights are recognized, but consumer rights are restricted, copyright terms are extended, and DRM trumps fair use. This is because knowledge is viewed as a form of property, not a social good. As the study notes, there is a danger in this approach: "Where IPRs [intellectual property rights] are understood as comparable to conventional property rights, public domain could potentially disappear altogether, just as the enclosure movement eradicated common land all over the UK in the late 18th century." The second model currently describes the UK, where knowledge is an asset first and a public resource second. This means that producers are generally protected first, and while more consumer rights may be upheld, the relationship between DRM and fair use is not resolved, and copyright terms may be continuously extended. The third model is that of a society where knowledge is first seen as a public resource and only secondarily as an asset. Comparing this to the "open access" movement in academic publishing, the authors note that such an approach is not anti-business. Under this model, public interest is the basis for IP policy, copyright terms are not extended, and fair use trumps DRM. Finally, the fourth model is "cyber-socialism," where knowledge is seen only as a public resource and copyright is not allowed. The profits of creativity are returned to the public and a "new ethic of playfulness and voluntarism" is the norm. The authors see these ideals at work in open source projects like Linux and Wikipedia, but point out that "it is not clear how such a model could be used to fit in investment-heavy models of innovation and creativity, such as the development of drugs or films." Recommendations When it comes to issuing recommendations, the report is clear: the UK should move gradually from the second model to the third. The obvious objection that arises is that such a model is "anti-business" and does not reward producers for their investments of time and money. The authors of the report shrewdly point out, though, that "the goal of a policy framework that suits business in general is illusory." Business is not a monolith; while certain approaches to intellectual property might be better for certain types of businesses, companies can thrive even under the fourth model (think of open source firms like Red Hat). Furthermore, the authors believe that making knowledge a social good first will actually foster increased innovation and therefore more money for UK businesses. In defense of their position that the public interest has no strong advocate at the bargaining table, the report points out that the Patent Office's official mission is to "stimulate innovation and enhance the international competitiveness of British industry and commerce," not to ensure that British citizens have appropriate access to knowledge. Were the government to transition to the third model, that would have to change. The government itself is less keen on any sort of radical change to the current system, but has shown a willingness to consider ideas found in the report. But the government will give much more consideration to whatever recommendations are made by the Gowers Review. Ripping a CD legally While some of the larger structural changes desired by the IPPR might not end up as Gowers Review recommendations, one of their specific proposals stands a good chance of becoming law in the near future. Britain has a bizarre copyright law that prevents consumers from legally ripping music from CD to their portable music players, which criminalizes the activities of half the people in the country, according the the Guardian. Ian Kearns, the deputy director of the IPPR, told the paper, "When it comes to protecting the interests of copyright holders, the emphasis the music industry has put on tackling illegal distribution and not prosecuting for personal copying is right. But it is not the music industry's job to decide what rights consumers have. That is the job of government." The IPPR report calls for the removal of the restriction on CD ripping. With most people doing it anyway, you can bet such an item would be a popular feature of the Gowers Review. We'll know within weeks whether it made the cut. From aarti at sarai.net Sun Nov 5 23:01:20 2006 From: aarti at sarai.net (Aarti Sethi) Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2006 23:01:20 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Seminar @ Sarai: SV Srinivas: Rajnikanth doesn't only speak Tamil Message-ID: <46D37046-C2FB-4CCF-A361-1364A1A142A7@sarai.net> ============== Seminar @ Sarai ============== "Rajnikanth doesnt only speak Tamil: Towards a theory of South Indian Stardom." A talk by S.V Srinivas 3:30 P.M., Monday, 6 November 2006, Seminar Room Sarai-CSDS Film Screening: Baba (Suresh Krissna, Tamil, 2002), Seminar Room S.V. Srinivas is a Fellow at the Centre for the Study of Culture and Society, Bangalore. He has a Ph.D. from the University of Hyderabad. He is currently working on a post-doctoral project titled “Democracy and Spectatorship in India: Telugu Popular Cinema and Hong Kong Action Film” funded by SEPHIS. He has written articles on Telugu cinema and its audiences in Deep Focus, Economic and Political Weekly, Framework and Journal of Arts and Ideas. From vivek at sarai.net Mon Nov 6 19:55:00 2006 From: vivek at sarai.net (Vivek Narayanan) Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2006 19:55:00 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] VN, poems, bangalore Message-ID: <454F45BC.30608@sarai.net> PLEASE COME: ...and duly inform any sympathetic souls I may have missed in this mailing... *************************************************************************** Toto Funds the Arts is delighted to invite you to the Bangalore launch of Vivek Narayanan’s first collection of poems, Universal Beach The book will be released by eminent film, theatre and television director and writer Prakash Belawadi at the Crossword Bookstore (ACR Towers, Ground Floor, 32 Residency Road, Bangalore 1) on Thursday, November 9, 2006 at 6.30 pm Vivek Narayanan will read and perform from the book, as well as from a selection of poems from a new work in progress, Lectures in Indian History. *************************************************************************** Thanks, Vivek From gopa.kumar at centad.org Tue Nov 7 16:39:11 2006 From: gopa.kumar at centad.org (Gopa Kumar) Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 16:39:11 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Access to Medicines Workshop - India Social Forum Message-ID: <02af01c7025d$2a2c0310$6701a8c0@gopacba9226de3> DO YOU THINK YOUR HEALTH SHOULD DEPEND ON YOUR WEALTH? Centre for Trade and Development (Centad), All India Drug Action Network (AIDAN), Indian Network for Persons Living with HIV/AIDS (INP+), ActionAid India, Campaign for Access to Essential Medicines -MSF and the Lawyers Collective HIV/AIDS Unit invite you to a workshop on "ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE MEDICINES" S6, INDIA SOCIAL FORUM, 11th NOVEMBER, 9.00 AM - 12.00 Access to safe and affordable medication and treatment in India has, over the past two years, come under increasing threat. Multinational drug companies can now get 20 year patents i.e. monopolies on medicines and treatment in India - monopolies that they have exploited the world over to charge exorbitant prices and hold peoples' health to ransom! Now they are pressuring our government to introduce even more monopolies. They are also dragging patients groups to court - Swiss Pharma Company Novartis has taken cancer patients to the Chennai high court for successfully challenging their monopoly on a cancer drug that Novartis wants to sell us for Rs. 1,20,000 per patient per month as opposed to the Rs. 8000 per patient per month that Indian generic companies charge. And in all this, our government is not only bowing to their pressure to introduce more monopolies, it is even going back on its promise to control the prices of essential drugs. Public interest groups are meeting these challenges head on by opposing the patents of these companies, by opposing moves by the government to accept their demands and by fighting them in court. JOIN US TO BUILD PEOPLES' OPPOSITION TO MONOPOLIES ON MEDICINES AND TO ENSURE ACCESS TO TREATMENT "ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE MEDICINES" DATE: SATURDAY, 11th NOVEMBER 2006 TIME: 9.00 AM - 12.00 PM VENUE: S6, INDIA SOCIAL FORUM, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/commons-law/attachments/20061107/1458dfe4/attachment.html From seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org Thu Nov 9 08:11:31 2006 From: seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org (Seth Johnson) Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2006 21:41:31 -0500 Subject: [Commons-Law] FTC Chief Pipes Up Again on "Net Neutrality" Message-ID: <4552955B.D1820A8E@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> (Text pasted below. -- Seth) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: FTC chief warns against 'unnecessary' Net rules From: "Dewayne Hendricks" Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 18:18:52 -0800 FTC chief warns against 'unnecessary' Net rules By Anne Broache, Staff Writer, CNET News.com CNET News.com reports the head of the Federal Trade Commission on Monday voiced reluctance toward adopting consumer protection laws that target technological concerns du jour, saying the "collective voice" of consumers often prompts change. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- End of Dewayne-Net Digest --- > http://news.com.com/FTC+chief+warns+against+unnecessary+Net+regulations/2100-1028_3-6132772.html FTC chief warns against 'unnecessary' Net rules Deborah Platt Majoras says consumer voices, market forces, existing laws are often good enough to remedy problems. By Anne Broache Staff Writer, CNET News.com Published: November 6, 2006, 8:10 AM PST Last modified: November 6, 2006, 8:54 AM PST WASHINGTON--The head of the Federal Trade Commission on Monday voiced reluctance toward adopting consumer protection laws that target technological concerns du jour, saying the "collective voice" of consumers often prompts change. Deborah Platt Majoras, the agency's Republican chairman, said she prefers relying on a combination of existing laws, vigorous competition and user pressure to address complaints about new products or potentially worrisome uses of technology. For proof, look no further than a situation in September in which hundreds of thousands of people who use the popular social-networking site Facebook rebelled against a new feature that some charged was Big Brother-esque, Majoras said. Within days, the site's founder had quieted some of the fury by giving people the option of turning off the "minifeed," which shows people whenever someone in their network makes a change to their relationship status, favorite music or other profile information. "On the Internet, consumers appear to reign supreme, and they can be very powerful and tough customers," Majoras told an audience of about 300 people in a morning speech here that kicked off a series of public hearings hosted by the FTC. Dubbed "Protecting Consumers in the Next Tech-ade," the three-day event is billed by the agency as a counterpart to global consumer-protection hearings held in 1995. This week's lineup is scheduled to include panelists predicting how topics like communication, social networking, advertising, computing power and security will change over the next 10 years. Despite the vast differences in technology use between 1995 and today, existing laws that cover "unfair and deceptive practices" have proven elastic enough in many cases for Internet Age adaptations, Majoras said in her opening remarks. Ten years ago, "we weren't even talking about spyware as a potential problem. But when it emerged, we determined we needed no new law or regulation to begin combating the scourge," she said. Majoras said the FTC would nonetheless "continue to vigorously enforce all the laws at our disposal," such as the Can-Spam Act of 2003, which critics charge has done little to curb the rise of unsolicited e-mail. The FTC chief on Monday stayed away from an issue that advocates have flagged as a major consumer protection issue this year: Net neutrality, the idea that network operators such as Verizon Communications and AT&T must be prohibited from charging Internet content providers premium prices for speedier delivery. Whether new regulations are necessary to prevent what Net neutrality proponents refer to as an Internet "fast lane" has generated a significant split. Network operators and hardware manufacturers generally reject the need for new laws, while Internet companies such as Google and Yahoo, as well as consumer groups, have been lobbying for their passage. But Majoras said during an August speech that she didn't see the need for new regulations because there has been no demonstrated harm to consumers, that normal market forces will likely prevent any problems, and that new laws will cause more problems than they solve. The FTC is currently undertaking a study on Net neutrality and plans to issue policy recommendations. That step was lauded by FTC Commissioner Jon Leibowitz, a Democrat, when he took the stage later Monday morning. "Will carriers block, slow or interfere with applications?" Leibowitz asked. "If so, will consumers be told about this before they sign up? In my mind, failure to disclose these procedures would be...unfair and deceptive." Unlike Majoras, Leibowitz said there's still room for Congress to act in at least one realm--specifically, to devise a "consensus antispyware law." Right now, federal regulators may only require spyware purveyors found to violate consumer protection laws to hand over ill-gotten profits--as they did in a settlement announced Friday with adware manufacturer Zango. Congress needs to grant the FTC the power to levy fines on top of that, creating an added deterrent, Leibowitz said. The "Tech-ade" hearings continue through Wednesday in George Washington University's Lisner Auditorium and via Webcast. A private session for law enforcement and government officials is slated for Thursday. CNET News.com's Declan McCullagh contributed to this report. From seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org Thu Nov 9 17:20:58 2006 From: seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org (Seth Johnson) Date: Thu, 09 Nov 2006 06:50:58 -0500 Subject: [Commons-Law] SELF: EU Collaborative Training Project in Free Software Message-ID: <45531622.83DF81F6@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> > http://ec.europa.eu/idabc/en/document/5833/469 > http://isoc.nl/SELF/kickoff/ > http://www.selfproject.eu/project > http://www.isoc.org/isoc/general/trustees/docs/Feb2006/SELF_project_intro.pdf Submissions: > http://www.selfproject.eu/repository/submit --- > http://ec.europa.eu/idabc/en/document/5833/469 EU: SELF project issues call for Free Software materials Open Source News – 15 September 2006 – EU and Europe-wide – Evaluations, Pilots and Studies SELF, an EU-funded international project aimed at creating a global platform for the collaborative sharing and creation of educational and training materials for Free software and Open standards, is calling for the submission of relevant materials. SELF (Science Education and Learning in Freedom), is an international project that aims to provide a global platform for the collaborative sharing and creation of educational and training materials relating to Free and Open Source Software and Open standards. It is designed both to provide information and access to relevant training materials and to offer a platform for the evaluation, adaptation, creation and translation of these materials. The production process will be based on the organisational model of Wikipedia, with collaborative input from many partners. The SELF platform was initiated by an international consortium of seven partners - three universities: Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (Spain), University of Gothenburg (Sweden) and Homi Bhabha Centre for Science Education (India); and four non-profit organisations active as open source advocates: the Internet Society (Netherlands), Free Software Foundation Europe (in all European countries), the Internet Society (Bulgaria) and Fundación Via Libre (Argentina). It aims to create a community of all parties interested in education and training in relation to Free Software and Open standards. As such it especially welcomes universities, schools, training centres, Free Software communities, software companies, publishers and government bodies. All users are encouraged to participate in both the production process and the exploitation of results. Further information: * SELF Project: http://www.selfproject.eu/project * Call for Materials: http://www.selfproject.eu/repository/submit --- > http://isoc.nl/SELF/kickoff/ EC Project to promote Free Software and Open Standards International SELF Project Kick-off on July 10th in The Hague Keywords: Open Content, Free Software, Open Source, Open Standards, Education, Information Society, Knowledge Platform EC to invest in Free Software promotion and education The European Commission is directing more and more money to promote the use of Free Software and Open Standards, which is a strategic objective within the IST (Information Society Technologies) Programme. The EC has signed a contract for this purpose with the SELF Consortium, a group of universities and free software advocates in seven countries, including Bulgaria, Argentina and India. The SELF project will be funded for the initial period (two years) with about 1 million euro. A short intro on the SELF project SELF is an international project that aims to provide a platform for the collaborative sharing and creation of open educational and training materials about Free Software and Open Standards. First of all, it will provide information, educational and training materials on Free Software and Open Standards presented in different languages and forms. Secondly, it will offer a platform for the evaluation, adaptation, creation and translation of these materials. The production process of such materials will be based on the organisational model of Wikipedia. Why the SELF platform? The SELF project starts from three key reasons: 1) Free Software and Open Standards are crucial to support the competitive position of the European software industry; 2) the real and long term technological change from private to free software can only come by investing in education and training; and 3) the production of educational and training materials on Free Software and Open Standards should be done collaboratively by all the parties involved. Who is the SELF Consortium? The SELF platform is initiated by an international consortium including three universities: Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (Spain), University of Gothenburg (Sweden) and Homi Bhabha Centre for Science Education (India). And four non-profit organisations active as Free Software advocates: Internet Society (Netherlands), Free Software Foundation Europe (in all European countries), Internet Society (Bulgaria) and Fundación Via Libre (Argentina). Which are the target groups of the SELF project? The SELF platform seeks to facilitate educational institutes, business, governmental organisations as well as non-profit organisations. --- > http://www.selfproject.eu/project Science, Education and Learning in Freedom SELF is an international project aiming to provide a platform for the collaborative sharing and creation of free educational and training materials on Free Software and Open Standards. Free Software In contrast to proprietary software, Free Software can be freely used, copied, studied, modified and redistributed. Free Software offers the freedom to learn and to teach without any proprietary barriers – the basic requirement for the self-enabled human in the information society. Open Standards and the ability to exchange data and to share information and knowledge have become essential for cost-effective, flexible and transparent support of government and business processes. Background Free Software applications are available in all fields and can be obtained from many websites. However, to use them you must first know of their existence and practical value. In addition, the lack of technical support has been called upon as a reason to failure or delay for the adoption of Free Software applications. The real and long term technological change from private to Free Software can only come by investing in education and training. The SELF Platform creates awareness on the advantages of the use of Free Software and provides educational and training materials to learn how to use Free Software applications. The SELF Platform is 1. a repository with free educational and training materials on Free Software and Open Standards 2. an environment for the collaborative creation of new materials Inspired by Wikipedia, the SELF Platform provides the materials in different languages and forms. The SELF Platform is also an instrument for evaluation, adaptation, creation and translation of these materials. Most importantly, the SELF Platform is a tool to unite community and professional efforts for public benefit. The SELF Community The SELF Platform aims to be a community of all interested parties associated with educational and training materials about Free Software and Open Standards. The SELF Platform specifically embraces universities, schools, training centres, Free Software communities, software companies, publishers and government bodies. All users are encouraged to participate in the production process and the exploitation of results. Those who participate in the platform can improve their own contents collaboratively while gaining expertise, prestige and recognition within the community. Simultaneously their participation helps to improve the SELF materials enhancing the SELF community. As a result the community model of the SELF Platform assures a prevailing situation for those who provide efforts to the platform and those who use it. Organisation The SELF Platform is initiated by an international consortium of seven partners in Europe, Asia and Latin America. Three universities and four non-profit organisations work closely together to facilitate communities as well as to raise awareness and to contribute to the building of critical mass for the use of Free Software and Open Standards. Initial set up The European Commission supports the SELF project for the initial set up of the platform and the first educational and training materials. Additional funding is expected from national and local governments for localisation, dissemination and specific activities. Once established, participating members from target groups will benefit from the platform and exploit its results freely. The aim is to produce a snow ball effect starting with public funding. SELF - Science Education and Learning in Freedom -- RIAA is the RISK! Our NET is P2P! http://www.nyfairuse.org/action/ftc DRM is Theft! We are the Stakeholders! New Yorkers for Fair Use http://www.nyfairuse.org [CC] Counter-copyright: http://realmeasures.dyndns.org/cc I reserve no rights restricting copying, modification or distribution of this incidentally recorded communication. Original authorship should be attributed reasonably, but only so far as such an expectation might hold for usual practice in ordinary social discourse to which one holds no claim of exclusive rights. From gwen at eff.org Mon Nov 6 23:01:39 2006 From: gwen at eff.org (Gwen Hinze) Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 09:31:39 -0800 Subject: [Commons-Law] [Broadcast-discuss] Regarding Google and YouTube In-Reply-To: <4545F7C9.988C9D09@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> References: <4545F7C9.988C9D09@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> Message-ID: Note that unlike Yahoo!, which has expressly advocated for the treaty, Google has *not* taken a public stance on this Treaty. Gwen At 8:02 AM -0500 10/30/06, Seth Johnson wrote: >A few strands to link up: > >Youtube's practice is precisely in accord with the WIPO >Broadcaster's Treaty. The notion is to watermark video streams >so you can tell who broadcast particular broadcasts, then create >an unconstitutional, but international-treaty-based >"broadcaster's right" to enforce that in complete disregard for >basic rights. A fundamental change in the nature of the public >domain (and the Internet). > >I don't know a lot about the "Homeland Stupidity" site that >follows, but take note of the following (text pasted below): > >> >>http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2006/02/22/google-in-bed-with-us-intelligence/ > > >Google recently acquired Youtube. Despite their net neutrality >stance, Google is now in a position to help facilitate the end of >net neutrality through the broadcaster's treaty. > > >Seth > >--- > >> >>http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2006/02/22/google-in-bed-with-us-intelligence/ > >Google in bed with U.S. intelligence > > >By Michael Hampton > >Posted: February 22, 2006 11:31 am > > >Even while Google presents a public image of vigorously >protecting its users’ privacy, it has quietly provided assistance >to several U.S. intelligence agencies, such as the Central >Intelligence Agency and Defense Intelligence Agency, as the U.S. >prosecutes its war on terrorism. In addition, Google may be >providing assistance to the National Security Agency. > >IT contractors and intelligence officials familiar with the >arrangement confirmed to HSToday.us that Google had been >providing assistance to the intelligence community, but would not >say under what authority that assistance had been requested or >provided. > >The intelligence community appears to be interested in data >mining Google’s vast store of information on each user who uses >Google’s services. Google collects data on each user’s search >queries, which web sites users visited after making a query, and >through its Google Analytics service, can also track users on >cooperating web sites. It’s not clear what level of access to or >how much of this information has been made available to >intelligence agencies. > > The contractor, who spoke on a not-for-attribution basis, >said that at least one US intelligence agency he declined to >identify is working to “leverage Google’s [user] data monitoring” >capability as part of an effort by the IC to glean from this data >information of “national security intelligence interest” in the >war on terror. . . . > > One of the sources did say, however, that the CIA’s Office of >Research and Development “has been giving them additional money >and guidance and requirements.” > > Last November, the CIA - through In-Q-Tel [CIA venture >capital company] - issued notices to sell $2.2 million worth of >Google stock. > > Robert David Steele, intelligence veteran and CEO of OSS.Net, >Inc. which sponsored last week’s event, told HSToday.us Tuesday >evening that “Google is being actively hypocritical and deceptive >in playing up its refusal to help the Department of Justice when >all along it has been taking money and direction for elements of >the US Intelligence Community, including the Office of Research >and Development at the Central Intelligence Agency, In-Q-Tel, and >in all probability, both the National Security Agency (NSA) and >the Army’s Intelligence and Security Command.” > > Steele added, “I have no doubt that Google, in its arrogance, >decided it could make a deal with the devil and not get caught.” >— HSToday.us > >If you are extremely concerned about the possibility that your >private browsing information is going to wind up in the hands of >U.S. intelligence agencies, you can throw a spanner in the works >by blocking cookies from the following domains: google.com, >googlesyndication.com, google-analytics.com, and your >country-specific Google domain (e.g. google.co.uk). If you >actually use Google services, such as Google Mail, then this >obviously will prevent you from using those services. > >Even with cookies blocked, a limited amount of user tracking is >possible, so unless you really are a terrorist, it probably isn’t >worth the trouble. I still have all of my Google Cookies. Then >again, I already know they’re watching me > > >-- > >[CC] Counter-copyright: http://realmeasures.dyndns.org/cc > >I reserve no rights restricting copying, modification or >distribution of this incidentally recorded communication. >Original authorship should be attributed reasonably, but only so >far as such an expectation might hold for usual practice in >ordinary social discourse to which one holds no claim of >exclusive rights. > >_______________________________________________ >Broadcast-discuss mailing list >Broadcast-discuss at lists.essential.org >http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/broadcast-discuss -- Gwen Hinze International Affairs Director Electronic Frontier Foundation Email:gwen at eff.org Tel.: + 1 415 436 9333 x110 Please support EFF - Working hard to protect your digital rights and freedom of speech since 1990 From jays at panix.com Tue Nov 7 01:36:49 2006 From: jays at panix.com (Jay Sulzberger) Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 15:06:49 -0500 (EST) Subject: [Commons-Law] [Upd-discuss] Re: [Broadcast-discuss] Regarding Google and YouTube In-Reply-To: References: <4545F7C9.988C9D09@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> Message-ID: On Mon, 6 Nov 2006, Gwen Hinze wrote: > Note that unlike Yahoo!, which has expressly advocated for the treaty, Google > has *not* taken a public stance on this Treaty. > > > Gwen Let us speak with Google. oo--JS. > > > > > > At 8:02 AM -0500 10/30/06, Seth Johnson wrote: >> A few strands to link up: >> >> Youtube's practice is precisely in accord with the WIPO >> Broadcaster's Treaty. The notion is to watermark video streams >> so you can tell who broadcast particular broadcasts, then create >> an unconstitutional, but international-treaty-based >> "broadcaster's right" to enforce that in complete disregard for >> basic rights. A fundamental change in the nature of the public >> domain (and the Internet). >> >> I don't know a lot about the "Homeland Stupidity" site that >> follows, but take note of the following (text pasted below): >> >>> >>> http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2006/02/22/google-in-bed-with-us-intelligence/ >> >> >> Google recently acquired Youtube. Despite their net neutrality >> stance, Google is now in a position to help facilitate the end of >> net neutrality through the broadcaster's treaty. >> >> >> Seth >> >> --- >> >>> >>> http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2006/02/22/google-in-bed-with-us-intelligence/ >> >> Google in bed with U.S. intelligence >> >> >> By Michael Hampton >> >> Posted: February 22, 2006 11:31 am >> >> >> Even while Google presents a public image of vigorously >> protecting its users� privacy, it has quietly provided assistance >> to several U.S. intelligence agencies, such as the Central >> Intelligence Agency and Defense Intelligence Agency, as the U.S. >> prosecutes its war on terrorism. In addition, Google may be >> providing assistance to the National Security Agency. >> >> IT contractors and intelligence officials familiar with the >> arrangement confirmed to HSToday.us that Google had been >> providing assistance to the intelligence community, but would not >> say under what authority that assistance had been requested or >> provided. >> >> The intelligence community appears to be interested in data >> mining Google�s vast store of information on each user who uses >> Google�s services. Google collects data on each user�s search >> queries, which web sites users visited after making a query, and >> through its Google Analytics service, can also track users on >> cooperating web sites. It�s not clear what level of access to or >> how much of this information has been made available to >> intelligence agencies. >> >> The contractor, who spoke on a not-for-attribution basis, >> said that at least one US intelligence agency he declined to >> identify is working to �leverage Google�s [user] data monitoring� >> capability as part of an effort by the IC to glean from this data >> information of �national security intelligence interest� in the >> war on terror. . . . >> >> One of the sources did say, however, that the CIA�s Office of >> Research and Development �has been giving them additional money >> and guidance and requirements.� >> >> Last November, the CIA - through In-Q-Tel [CIA venture >> capital company] - issued notices to sell $2.2 million worth of >> Google stock. >> >> Robert David Steele, intelligence veteran and CEO of OSS.Net, >> Inc. which sponsored last week�s event, told HSToday.us Tuesday >> evening that �Google is being actively hypocritical and deceptive >> in playing up its refusal to help the Department of Justice when >> all along it has been taking money and direction for elements of >> the US Intelligence Community, including the Office of Research >> and Development at the Central Intelligence Agency, In-Q-Tel, and >> in all probability, both the National Security Agency (NSA) and >> the Army�s Intelligence and Security Command.� >> >> Steele added, �I have no doubt that Google, in its arrogance, >> decided it could make a deal with the devil and not get caught.� >> � HSToday.us >> >> If you are extremely concerned about the possibility that your >> private browsing information is going to wind up in the hands of >> U.S. intelligence agencies, you can throw a spanner in the works >> by blocking cookies from the following domains: google.com, >> googlesyndication.com, google-analytics.com, and your >> country-specific Google domain (e.g. google.co.uk). If you >> actually use Google services, such as Google Mail, then this >> obviously will prevent you from using those services. >> >> Even with cookies blocked, a limited amount of user tracking is >> possible, so unless you really are a terrorist, it probably isn�t >> worth the trouble. I still have all of my Google Cookies. Then >> again, I already know they�re watching me� >> >> >> -- >> >> [CC] Counter-copyright: http://realmeasures.dyndns.org/cc >> >> I reserve no rights restricting copying, modification or >> distribution of this incidentally recorded communication. >> Original authorship should be attributed reasonably, but only so >> far as such an expectation might hold for usual practice in >> ordinary social discourse to which one holds no claim of >> exclusive rights. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Broadcast-discuss mailing list >> Broadcast-discuss at lists.essential.org >> http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/broadcast-discuss > > > -- > Gwen Hinze > International Affairs Director > Electronic Frontier Foundation > Email:gwen at eff.org > Tel.: + 1 415 436 9333 x110 > > Please support EFF - Working hard to protect your digital rights and freedom > of speech since 1990 > _______________________________________________ > Upd-discuss mailing list > Upd-discuss at lists.essential.org > http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/upd-discuss > > From prashantiyengar at gmail.com Sat Nov 11 12:33:27 2006 From: prashantiyengar at gmail.com (Prashant Iyengar) Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2006 12:33:27 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Free Ryder Message-ID: <908adbd0611102303o746ce54ekeb547d9e1a595bf9@mail.gmail.com> Dear All, I dont know how many of you know of and are eagerly awaiting the release of the eminent Rodney Ryder's forthcoming orignal masterpiece on the "Right to Information" to be brought out by the friendly publishers Ms Wadhwa and Co (Rs 995 in India, US $100 in USA, and 75 pounds in UK). This is just an email to caution those of you who are expecting exclusively his refreshingly original views in the book - "Dont bother". It turns out that about 150-200 pages of this book have been copied directly (including errors) and without permission from a manuscript submitted to the nice publishers by Dr. Madabhushi Sridhar a noted journalist in AP and faculty at NALSAR University of Law Hyderabad. Following the lodging of a criminal compliant in this regard at a police station in Hyderabad, the publishers were forced to settle with Dr Sridhar and now the book will be brought out with a notification stating that several pages have been directly copied from his work. I've included a comparative table of the extent of direct lifting below this email. Apart from the disappointment many of will be experiencing that we many not (yet) be treated to the eminent scholar's exclusively own views on the subject, one might also be puzzled as to what lessons one must now draw from two of his other books - Ryder Rodney, D Intellectual Property & The Internal Software, New Delhi, Delhi Law House , 2002 - Ryder, Rodney D, Intellectual Property and the Internet, New Delhi: Butterworths, 2002 Is this listed as one of the ideas Mr. Ryder advocates to earn oneself a monopoly? (*Intellectual Property for Managers: Turning Ideas into Virtual Monopoly- Rodney Ryder) * Even more, I'm now eaglerly looking forward to ascertaining his views on "Enfocement of IP Rights" which he is scheduled to speak about in a forthcoming International Seminar on IP Rights. (Brochure at http://www.nalsar.ac.in/brochure.pdf ) . This looks like its going to be a learned view, a real hands-on expert's view. Regards, Prashant *From Sridhar's Script Subheadings etc* *Sridhar's pages* *Rodney's pages* 1 Sweden and Openness of Administration In Finland, In Britain, In South Africa, Three Acts in America 60-62 34-36 2 Struggle for Information 5-12 38-44 3 Freedom of Information Legislations around the world 279 to 325 55-95 4 Constitutional basis for right to information 45-53 242-243, 244-247 with some changes 5 Information Regime in India 62-65 254-257 6 Intention of Legislature 4-5 266-267 7 Role of judiciary in shaping the information law 13-17 267-271 Information as National Wealth Government as Trustee 17-20 272-275 8 Voter's right to information 223-238 279-291 9 Facilitating Audit of Information for Grievance Redressal, Public Hearing 20-27 292-297 10 Public Authority, Obligation of Public Bodies, Promotion of Open Government, Public education, Tackling culture of official secrecy, UK Act, The Duty of Public Authority to Confirm or Deny. Consequence of Withholding information: Enron case study, Public Notification, Principle of Maximum Disclosure, Open Meetings, Disclosure Takes precedence 87-99 311-321 10 Public Information Officer PIO 99-100 321-322 11 Experiment in Madhya Pradesh 29-37 323-330 12 Public Interest disclosure Bill 2002 208-221 330-341 13 Working group on promotion 37-40 341-344 14 Recommendation of Parliamentary Committee 41-42 344-344 15 Disclosure as statutory duty 65-69 344-347 16 Procedure to obtain information 100-103 351-354 17 Payment of fees 105-107 359-361 18 Disclosure and Privilege to withhold 72-75 364-366 19 Exemptions 108-121 366-376 19 Restrictions 75-76 376-378 20 Refusing to give information 121-129 380-386 21 Relief from rigidity 388-390 with changes 22 Independent forum 132-133 417-418 23 Need to punish denial 75-82 423-428 24 Good faith 133-135 429-430 25 Transparency v Secrecy Denial of access to judiciary, unlimited power 135-136 438-439 27 AP Bill 400-408 602-607 28 Comparative Table of RTI legislations in India 366-369 Annexure I pages liii to lv -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/commons-law/attachments/20061111/337d1804/attachment.html From vinay at nls.ac.in Sat Nov 11 19:57:39 2006 From: vinay at nls.ac.in (Vinay Aravind) Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2006 19:57:39 +0530 (IST) Subject: [Commons-Law] Free-Ryder In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <48678.59.94.109.43.1163255259.squirrel@59.94.109.43> Without making any judgements on Mr. Ryder or his actions, I think it fit to point out that I am reviewing one of his earlier books for a magazine and large swathes of it appear to be lifted directly from several freely available internet sites. vinay From amicusjuris at gmail.com Sat Nov 11 21:21:55 2006 From: amicusjuris at gmail.com (amicus juris) Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2006 21:21:55 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Free-Ryder In-Reply-To: <48678.59.94.109.43.1163255259.squirrel@59.94.109.43> References: <48678.59.94.109.43.1163255259.squirrel@59.94.109.43> Message-ID: <60b2d0be0611110751x3b620f7asb99d67a108f576bb@mail.gmail.com> Seems he is taking us for a ride . . . .. not a free ride, though. -- DR. SAIF MAHMOOD LL.M., PhD, SIAL (London), CADR (UN) Senior Partner Amicus Juris Lawyers B-113/114, Triveni Apartments Sheikh Sarai - I, New Delhi - 110 017 & C - 6, East of Kailash, New Delhi Phones : 91 11 26012702, 26018380 (telefax) This email may contain confidential attorney-client communication. If you are not its addressee, please send it back to us. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/commons-law/attachments/20061111/dd086bbc/attachment.html From anasuya_s at yahoo.com Sun Nov 12 07:10:51 2006 From: anasuya_s at yahoo.com (Anasuya Sengupta) Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2006 07:10:51 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Free-Ryder Message-ID: <45567BA3.4030908@yahoo.com> Vinay, don't worry about passing judgement on Mr Ryder and his actions. I think it's a fit time to quote Tom Lehrer : Plagiarize, Let no one else's work evade your eyes, Remember why the good Lord made your eyes, So don't shade your eyes, But plagiarize, plagiarize, plagiarize - Only be sure always to call it please 'research'. -- Anasuya Sengupta www.sanmathi.org -- Anasuya Sengupta www.sanmathi.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/commons-law/attachments/20061112/851bd2d9/attachment.html From amicusjuris at gmail.com Sun Nov 12 10:07:24 2006 From: amicusjuris at gmail.com (amicus juris) Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2006 10:07:24 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Free-Ryder In-Reply-To: <45567BA3.4030908@yahoo.com> References: <45567BA3.4030908@yahoo.com> Message-ID: <60b2d0be0611112037nf518bb9jee43afbdea59ee26@mail.gmail.com> "some people have copied . . . . that means they have "searched" now some are trying to find out from where those people had copied . . . that means they are "researching"" cheers ! -- DR. SAIF MAHMOOD LL.M., PhD, SIAL (London), CADR (UN) Senior Partner Amicus Juris Lawyers B-113/114, Triveni Apartments Sheikh Sarai - I, New Delhi - 110 017 & C - 6, East of Kailash, New Delhi Phones : 91 11 26012702, 26018380 (telefax) This email may contain confidential attorney-client communication. If you are not its addressee, please send it back to us. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/commons-law/attachments/20061112/bc54a011/attachment.html From seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org Mon Nov 13 19:13:00 2006 From: seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org (Seth Johnson) Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 08:43:00 -0500 Subject: [Commons-Law] FreeCulture Demo Audio Blog with Jay on DRM and "Net Neutrality" Message-ID: <45587664.736F6D3@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [wwwac] Gareth Stack recorded a standard rant on DRM and Net Neutrality Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 01:57:08 -0500 From: To: wwwac at lists.wwwac.org which I delivered at the 30 September 2006 NYU Free Culture Club/Defective by Design rally against DRM at Apples' Fifth Avenue and 59th Street store: http://www.flickr.com/photos/freeculturenyu/sets/72157594306442005 The recording of my standard introduction to DRM and Net Neutrality is pointed to on http://www.dbspin.com/archives/138 and the good recording itself is at http://www.dbspin.com/content/audio/jay%20sulzberger.mp3 Almon Strowger, whose name I could not remember, took direct action for Net Neutrality: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almon_Strowger http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strowger_Automatic_Telephone_Exchange_Company And today, we have the insufficiently known Bruce Kushnick, who, in the East, is styled GREAT OCEAN OF TELEPHONE COMPANY TRUTH: http://www.teletruth.org oo--JS. ## The World Wide Web Artists' Consortium - http://www.wwwac.org/ ## ## To Unsubscribe, send email to: wwwac-unsubscribe at lists.wwwac.org ## From pritiwho at yahoo.com Tue Nov 21 09:28:34 2006 From: pritiwho at yahoo.com (Priti Radhakrishnan) Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 19:58:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Commons-Law] Indian Patent Searches In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <79048.3075.qm@web32009.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Dear Friends, I wanted to share with you the tremendously important website that Professor Bhaven Sampat at Columbia University has launched. For the past year, he and collaborator Patrick Crosby have been working to 'program' the Indian Patent Office's journals into a searchable database. The ability to search the Indian Patent Office's data has been greatly hindered by the lack of such a database. Now, it is possible for the public to search patent applications by company name or keyword. It is also possible to see what patents have been granted to date in India. The data are based on applications and patents published from January 2005 onwards (including the "mailbox" applications) and are updated weekly. Please visit http://india.bigpatents.org/ to access this important tool. If you have feedback on features, particularly any you would like to see included in the site, please send an e-mail to bns3 at columbia.edu with the subject line "Indian patent database". Best, Priti Radhakrishnan ____________________________________________________________________________________ Sponsored Link Degrees online in as fast as 1 Yr MBA, Bachelor's, Master's, Assoc http://yahoo.degrees.info From prashantiyengar at gmail.com Wed Nov 22 19:47:50 2006 From: prashantiyengar at gmail.com (Prashant Iyengar) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 19:47:50 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Kutrapathirikkai Message-ID: <908adbd0611220617j6de6cb2l17a377f227cc7646@mail.gmail.com> Hi, Interesting case being decided in the Madras HC. The CBFC refused a censor's certificate to a film based on Rajiv Gandhi's assassination on the grounds that tensions were being built up in Sri Lanka. Prashant http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/thscrip/print.pl?file=2006112105420500.htm&date=2006/11/21/&prd=th& CHENNAI:The First Bench of the Madras High Court will witness a special screening of the film, `Kutrapathirikkai,' reportedly based on the assassination of former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi. Though completed in 1993, the film could not be cleared for exhibition owing to litigation. On Monday, hearing a writ appeal by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) against an order directing it to grant a censor's certificate to the film, the Bench comprising Chief Justice A.P. Shah and Justice K. Chandru said the special screening should be held at 6.30 p.m. on November 23. Books published Wondering how the CBFC, which enjoys recommendatory powers under the statute, could file the present appeal, the judges pointed out that at least three books, including the one by the chief of Special Investigation Team (SIT) that investigated the assassination, had been written on the subject. Two Kannada films too had been made based on the assassination. The Bench asked senior counsel for the CBFC whether this meant that major incidents such as the terror attack on Parliament could not be filmed by anybody. In its petition, the CBFC said the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting decided to appeal against the order given the prevailing circumstances in Sri Lanka, where tensions were building up. "The issuance of certificate to this film at this juncture would further aggravate the situation," it said, adding, "it will not be in public interest to certify the film for public view as it would affect the security of the state, friendly relations with foreign states and public order as enshrined in Article 19(2) of the Constitution." � Copyright 2000 - 2006 The Hindu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/commons-law/attachments/20061122/7f8f5a95/attachment.html From seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org Sun Nov 26 11:11:53 2006 From: seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org (Seth Johnson) Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 00:41:53 -0500 Subject: [Commons-Law] WiFi Patent Breaks the Waves Message-ID: <45692921.51608846@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> > http://www.sda-asia.com/sda/features/psecom,id,764,srn,2,nodeid,4,_language,Singapore.html Wi-Fi Faces New Patent Woes A federal judge in Tyler, Texas, ruled last week that an Australian government agency holds the rights to patents on the underlying technology used in two Wi-Fi standards and a third proposed standard. The decision could have a wide-ranging impact on wireless equipment makers and consumer electronics manufacturers. Australias Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation filed a patent in 1996 that it says is employed in some IEEE standards, potentially including 802.11. The group said that Microsoft, Dell, HP, Intel, Apple, and Netgear have initiated legal action in an attempt to overturn the patent. The organisation says it intends to fight the action. This isn't the first time a company or organisation has tried to pursue companies in the 802.11 space for patent infringement. Last year a patent buying firm called Acacia began sending letters to access point makers that use redirect technologies, saying those firms owed royalties for a patent Acacia owns on redirect technologies. Its unclear how vigorously Acacia followed up on its pursuits, but the move caused an uproar in the industry. The question remains why the Australian organisation is deciding to pursue this patent at this stage in the market. While companies must be able to reap the rewards of their own research and development, there also must be consideration for the positive effects that low cost products can have on a market. "One reason that Wi-Fi has proliferated as it has is because it's reached a point where it's incredibly cheap, so it's easy to just stick a Wi-Fi chip in a consumer electronics device," said Stan Schatt, a vice president at ABI Research. "But if the cost of the technology goes up to pay for the license, even a little bit, it could throw off the economics." Indeed, Wi-Fi products generate billions of dollars in revenue for equipment makers. Just the access points that provide the actual Wi-Fi signals in local area networks are expected to generate USD 1.9 billion in 2006, according to ABI Research. That figure is expected to jump to USD 3.7 billion in 2010. From prashantiyengar at gmail.com Wed Nov 29 20:48:29 2006 From: prashantiyengar at gmail.com (Prashant Iyengar) Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 20:48:29 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Law on market revenues for scientists planned Message-ID: <908adbd0611290718u2cf05b3u4bafa2ae21c3a8fb@mail.gmail.com> The Hindu New Delhi,Nov. 28 With an aim to incentivise innovation, the Government plans to bring a legislation that assures that not less than 30 per cent of revenues earned from licence fee or commercialisation of a project goes to the scientist(s) who worked on the project. The legislation envisages accrual of another 30 per cent of fees to the project, while 40 per cent of the licence fees should be ploughed back to the institution where the project was taken up. The legislation is called the Public Funding of R&D Project (Protection of IP) Act. This law would be applicable to all public funded research and academic institutions, said Union Minister for Science and Technology Mr Kapil Sibal at the Indian Economic Summit. While the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) already has such norms, universities, IITs and IISc have internal processes, and levels of revenue share vary widely. While some institutions do not incentivise the innovators at all, some pay over 30 per cent of licence fees. The draft of this legislation is ready and would soon be put up on the Ministry Website for public comments, said Mr Sibal, adding that the legislation would be introduced during the Budget session of Parliament. He added that the Government would launch a scheme that would enable women to work from their homes. Ms Kiran Mazumdar-Shaw, Chairperson and Managing Director of Biocon, stressed on the need to create an ecosystem for encouraging academic research by ensuring funding by private and Government sectors. In the developed world, innovation carries a high cost of failure. But India's advantage lies in the low cost of doing research. India must, therefore, leverage the low-cost advantage to deliver high-value innovation, she said. Dr Naresh Trehan, Executive Director of the Escorts Heart Institute and Research Centre, said that in order to take care of medical delivery to a population of over a billion the country needs to explore traditional healthcare and medicine. "Indian Universities are facing a serious problem with very few students taking up research and the best minds in the faculty retiring," said Mr Hari S. Bhartia, co-Chairman and Managing Director of Jubilant Organosys. Inviting young scientists from India to undertake collaborative research, Mr Kiyoshi Kurokawa, Science Advisor to the Prime Minister of Japan, said: "Japan has strengths in areas such as solar energy and water management and can collaborate with countries to find innovative solutions that will benefit a large number of people." � Copyright 2000 - 2006 The Hindu Business Line -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/commons-law/attachments/20061129/6f0ff253/attachment.html From aarti at sarai.net Wed Nov 29 23:31:51 2006 From: aarti at sarai.net (Aarti Sethi) Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 23:31:51 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] Sensor-Census-Censor: International Colloquium at Sarai-CSDS on Information, Society, History, Politics Message-ID: <47F7C200-70FC-40FB-A0E5-1774FBF0ECDB@sarai.net> Dear Friends, This is to announce a three day International Colloquium on Information, Society, History and Politics, titled - 'Sensor-Census- Censor : Investigating Regimes of Information, Registering Changes of State' at Sarai-CSDS (29 Rajpur Road, Delhi 110054) on 30th November, 1 & 2 December. A detailed programme of the three days is given below. Participation by registration at the venue. Limited seats available. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------------------- PROGRAMME Day 1: 30 November 2006 9:30 - 9:45 Introduction Shuddhabrata Sengupta, Sarai-CSDS, Paul Keller,Waag Society Kerstin Lindberg, Delegation of the European Commission to India, Bhutan and Nepal [Introduces the EU-India ECCP project] 9:45 - 11:15 Panel 1: Information, Mobility and Exclusion: Borders, Passports and Identification Documents Moderator: Shuddhabrata Sengupta Sarai-CSDS Passport, Ticket and Rubber Stamp: The “problem of the pauper Hajji”, c. 1882-1926 Radhika Singha Associate Professor, Centre for Historical Studies, School of Social Sciences, Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi Passports, Literacy, Phantasm: The States of Writing Nation Vazira Fazila Yacoobali Zamindar Assistant Professor of History, Brown University, Providence 11:15 - 11:30 Tea 11:30 - 2:00Panel 2: Monitoring Surveillance Moderator: Tapio Mäkelä Media Artist/Researcher, Helsinki Exposure: Surveillance and the Political Economy of Interiority Kirstie Ball Senior Lecturer in Organisation Studies, Open University Business School, Walton Hall, Milton Keynes Machetes, Electrodes and Databases Sam De Silva Independent Media Maker and Facilitator, Colombo/Melbourne Security Culture and the Economy of Fear Konrad Becker Cultural Organiser/Artist/Activist, t0 Institute of Culture Technologies, Vienna 2:00 - 3:00 Lunch 3:00 - 4:45 Panel 3: The Artist As Information Practitioner Moderator: Rana Dasgupta Writer, Delhi Archival Malpractice and Counter-Strategies Charles Merewether Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Cross-Cultural Research, Australian National University, Canberra Information versus Dissemination: Artistic and Activist Strategies of Information Practice Ewen Chardronnet Artist/Critic/Information Activist, Tours Across Borders and beyond Definitions: Creating Concepts and Syndicating Content Florian Schneider Artist/Activist, kein.org, Munich 4:45 - 5:00 Tea 5:00 - 6:00 Film Screening Temporary Loss of Consciousness, 2005 Directed by Monica Bhasin Independent Filmmaker, Delhi Colour, 35 min. 6:00 - 6:15 Tea 6.30 - 7.45: Keynote: Histories of Identification Introduction: Shuddhabrata Sengupta Sarai-CSDS Why Did Fingerprinting Emerge in Colonial India? Governmentality, Surveillance and the Fear of the “Native” Chandak Sengoopta Professor, Department of History, Birkbeck College, University of London Day 2: 1 December 2006 10:00 - 11:15Keynote: The Record of Power Introduction: Prabhu Mahapatra Department of History, Delhi University Seeing Like a State: State Controls in Europe Since 1500 Leo Lucassen Professor, Leiden University/University of Amsterdam 11:15 - 11:30 Tea 11:30 - 1:30Panel 2: The Daily Life of Information Moderator: Jeebesh Bagchi Sarai-CSDS From the Chowkeydari Act to Biometric Identification: Passages from the History of the Information State in India Taha Mehmood Sarai-CSDS Garib Aadmi ko Kaun Dekhta Hai (Who Looks at the Poor Person)?TheKhullam-Khulla (Transparency) Principle and Beyond on the Streets of Delhi Aman Sethi Journalist, Frontline Magazine Documents as Date-Lines: The Making and Unmaking of Urban Settlements Shveta Sarda, Priya Sen and Jaanu Nagar (presented by Shveta Sarda) Cybermohalla Project, Ankur/Sarai-CSDS 1:30 - 2:30 Lunch 2:30 - 3:30 Panel 3: Neo-Liberal Governmentality and Risk: Information and Surveillance in India Uma Maheshwari Kalpagam Professor, G.B. Pant Social Studies Institute, Allahabad Respondent: Awadhendra Sharan Sarai-CSDS 3:30 - 3:45 Tea 3:45 - 5:45 Panel 4: Truth, Transmission and Technology Moderator: Ravi Sundaram Sarai-CSDS The Technology of Telegraphy and the Telegraphy of Technology: Magic and Speculation in the First Half of the Last Century Deep Kanta Lahiri Chaudhuri Historian, Jamia Millia Islamia University, Delhi ... And Nothing But the Truth: So Help Me Science Lawrence Liang Legal Theorist/Researcher, Alternative Law Forum, Bangalore Unofficial Secrets Act: The Administration of Certainty and Ambiguity Shuddhabrata Sengupta Sarai-CSDS 5:45 - 6:00 Artist Presentation KhirkeeYaan, 2006 Shaina Anand Independent Filmmaker, Chitra Karkhana, Mumbai 6:00 - 6.30 Tea 6.30 - 7.45 Keynote: Histories of Information Introduction: Radhika Singha Illegibility: Reading and Insecurity in 19th-Century Law and Government Jane Caplan Professor of Modern European History, St Antony’s College, University of Oxford 8:00 pm onwards: Conference Dinner, CSDS Lawns Day 3: 2 December 2006 10:00 - 12:15 Panel 1: Censorship and Memory Moderator: Nivedita Menon Department of Political Science, Delhi University Conversing the Cut: A Chronicle of Censorship in Egyptian Cinema 5 Channel Video (2005) Babak Afrassiabi Artist/Media Practitioner, Teheran/Rotterdam The Silence of the Arabs Mansour Jacoubi Activist/ Information Practitioner, Beirut Listening in the Archive, Listening for the Archive: History, Memory and the Archive Sadan Jha Sarai-CSDS 12:15 - 12:30 Tea 12:30 - 2:00 Panel 2: Network Effects Moderator: Monica Narula Sarai-CSDS Imagined Networks: Rhetoric, Poetics and Politics in Electronic Communities and Online Networks Wendy Chun Associate Professor, Brown University Resisting System Subjectification: Paranoia as a Culturally Specific Affect of Network Use Tapio Mäkelä Media Artist/Independent Researcher, Helsinki 2:00 - 3:00 Lunch 3:00 - 4:30 Panel 3: The Accession Register: Information Abundance, Scarcity and Libraries Moderator: Geert Lovink Institute for Network Cultures, Amsterdam The Class Library of Babel: Digital Librarianship and Copyright Circumvention Sebastian Lütgert Writer/Programmer/Artist, Berlin Memoirs of Information Work Avinash Jha Librarian, Centre for the Study of Developing Societies, Delhi “Because It’s There! Because I Can!” Desire and Information Economies of Abundance Felix Stalder Media Scholar, Zurich; Researcher/Organiser, Vienna and New York 4:30 - 4:45 Tea 4:45 - 6:00 Holes, Erasures, Silences: Archives and Absences Shahid Amin, Professor, Department of History, Delhi University In conversation with Mahmood Farooqui, Sarai-CSDS Introduction: Shuddhabrata Sengupta, Sarai-CSDS 6:00 - 6:15 Tea 6:15 - 7:00 Conference Conclusion: Open Session Moderator: Ravi Vasudevan, Sarai-CSDS ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----------------------------- The colloquium is a part of 'Towards a Culture of Open Networks' a collaborative initiative of Sarai- CSDS, (Delhi), Waag Society (Amsterdam) and t0 (Vienna). 'Towards a Culture of Open Networks' is supported by the EU-India Economic and Cultural Programme. The contents of the colloquium can under no circumstances however be regarded as reflecting the position of the European Union. From ratanjain at prachar.in Wed Nov 29 20:52:35 2006 From: ratanjain at prachar.in (Ratan Jain) Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 20:52:35 +0530 Subject: [Commons-Law] POLICING THE NETWORKS AND PRACTICES OF VIDEO Message-ID: <002901c71606$9bf49220$c500a8c0@RatanJain> Exhibition of Films through Video Cassette Recorder Rules -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/commons-law/attachments/20061129/6bc63522/attachment.html