Fsf-friends March 2005

fsf-friends@gnu.org.in

51 participants
107 discussions

LUGs/GLUGs/FSUGs survey
by Frederick Noronha (FN) 24 Mar '05

24 Mar '05

---------- Forwarded message ---------- >From "opensourceresearch" <opensourceresearch(a)IIMB.ERNET.IN> This is with respect to a large-scale, global research study about LUGs and their strategic importance in the open source ecosystem supported by the Indian Institute of Management (IIM) Bangalore and University of Washington. Your cooperation and support is highly appreciated. This survey contains 10 questions and takes less than 10 minutes. Please use the reply button to post your response. Question 1. When was your LUG formed? Question 2. What was the number of members at the time of its formation? Question 3. What is the current number of members in your LUG? Question 4. What was the highest number of members in your LUG's history? Question 5. What percent of your current members are active in your LUG? Question 6. How often does your LUG meet in a year? Question 7. When was the last meeting of your LUG held? Question 8. Indicate the percentage of your LUG members in these categories (total needs to add up to 100%). End-users (Users with low technical knowledge): Independent Consultants (Software profit-minded professionals): Company Representatives (Members from private or public corporations): Government Employees (Local, State or Federal): Educational Members (Includes Professors, Students and Staff): Others (please specify here____________________): Question 9. Indicate the success of your LUG with respect to its stated objectives (1=unsuccessful, 3= neither successful nor unsuccessful, 5=highly successful) Question 10. Would you like to receive a soft copy of the results? (Yes/No) We thank you for your participation. All responses will be held confidential and will be used for academic purposes only. T R Madanmohan & Rahul De Sandeep Krishnamurthy & Arvind Tripathi Indian Institute of Management, Bangalore University of Washington _____ _/ ____\____ Frederick Noronha * Freelance Journalist * Goa \ __\/ \ India T +91.832.2409490 M +919822 122436 | | | | \ http://fn.swiki.net http://goabooks.swiki.net |__| |___| / http://www.bytesforall.net http://www.bytesforall.org \/ ----------------------------------------------------- Sign up for low-volume, high-quality news summaries and updates from Goa at http://newsfromgoa.swiki.net * It's free and volunteer-driven.

1 0

Yet another shameless day in India
by Ramanraj K 23 Mar '05

23 Mar '05

http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/000200503222001.htm <quote> Lok Sabha passes Patents Bill ...The Bill provides for product patents in drugs, agri-products and embedded software... </quote>

11 17

see this
by amal dev manuel 23 Mar '05

23 Mar '05

hello friends, see the link. http://www.herowar.com/recruit.phtml?id=20413 this enirely runs on a debian box. amazing !!, isnt it ? tom __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/

1 0

Left saves the day!
by Ramanraj K 23 Mar '05

23 Mar '05

Certainly, many reports were far from accurate going against the debates reported at: http://164.100.24.208/today/tdailydeb.htm It may be a spectacular success after all! Not only, that, it *might* include an *important* amendment touching upon computer programs, that we should wait to hear from authoritative sources. Meanwhile, a little food for thought: I just had the chance to read the following document published at http://cpim.org/upa/2004_patents.pdf <quote> Left Parties on Amendments to the Indian Patent Act Dec 20, 2004 The Group of Ministers had made available to us the draft Patent (Third) Amendment Bill for our consideration and suggestions. We were told about the predicament faced by the Government: The Patents Act 1970 had already been substantially altered and diluted by the two amendment bills enacted by the previous NDA government. There was also the so-called deadline of TRIPs to be observed. And hence the need to push through the Third amendment bill as proposed. Either the reasoning or the conclusions of the Government did not convince us. Nevertheless, we tried to understand the compulsions of the Government and limit our suggestions to the absolute minimum that is needed to be done to safeguard the national interest... Draft Patents Bill 2003 ======================= Clause 3(k) and (ka) (k) a computer programme per se other than its technical application to industry or a combination with hardware; (ka) a mathematical method or a business method or algorithms; Amendment Suggested =================== Clause 3(k) (k) a mathematical method or a business method or a computer programme per se or algorithms; Clause (ka) be deleted Comments of Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion ======================================================= This issue has been discussed by the JPC during the 2nd Amendment to the Patents Act. The proposed changes are more in the nature of a classification, due to confusing interpretations that have arisen. Section 3 of the Act contains details of items which are not inventions within the meaning of the Act and hence, are not patentable. This section also provides, inter alia, that "a mathematical or computer programmes per se or algorithms" are not patentable. However, this provision has been subject to confusing interpretations, (such as whether 'per se' applies only to computers programme, or also to mathematical or business methods. Also, whether technical applications of computer programmes are patentable or not). Given the emerging opportunities in the software sector and growing Indian strength in information technology, it is necessary to clarify the provisions in Section 3 (k) so as to allow patenting of a computer programme only in case it has technical applicatioos in combination with hardware. Software alone is already protected under copyright laws. It is also proposed to clarify that a mathematical or business method or algorithm will not be patentable. The Department of Information Technology has suggested the incorporation of such a clarification which is now proposed to be included. The GoM has considered this issue and noted that the proposed clarification is in the larger national interest. Reply to Comments by Deptt. of Industrial Policy and promotion ============================================================== Draft Bill reduces the scope of what is not patentable in the area of computer programmes. This is not in the interest of the software industry in India. To the contray, it could promote the interests of monopolies like Microsoft. If the qualification per se is creating confusion, the same may be deleted from the original Clause 3 (k) of the present Act, without any other Amendments. </quote> I came to know about the above, just this morning from the cpim.org website. On 21st, the very same amendment was independently suggested for another reason: The best justification for the amendment sought is this: "Under the TRIPS agreement, "computer programs" shall be protected by copyrights. In this context "per se" is a meaningless qualification, and the amendment would make our law fully TRIPS compliant." The fact that US issues patents for software merely means that the US is violating TRIPS and India should complain to the WTO against the practice, claiming heavy damages for the violation. If India succeeds with this amendment, our friends in Europe would be too happy to follow suit. It would put considerable pressure on US to modify their law." If Section 3(k) reads "a mathematical or business method or computer program or algorithms", it should be a very, very important success, far beyond having the proposed changes alone dropped. We have now fulfilled all our so called "International Obligations" India *should* complain to the WTO against the US practice of "software patents" that are a serious trade barrier in US. Meanwhile, we should prepare a letter thanking all the people who have made this possible.

1 0

MS' influence redux
by balachandran c 23 Mar '05

23 Mar '05

In our discussion about the subject, we were pointing out the current state of affairs. Most of the actions proposed involved contacting the relevant authorities and pointing out the facts to them. While this is necessary, it is nowhere near sufficient. (Please don't misunderstand me, I do believe that it involves a lot of hard work, and it really is necessary). Let us assume that these efforts become successful. MS could still give away their software to students, or show off some eye candy (ooh, avalon is soo shiny). Suddenly, FS becomes that thing which you are forced to use, not something you choose to use. It is very easy to manipulate people's opinion against it, in this condition. This is under a very optimistic assumption. We could use the {horse, cart} analogy here?? Shouldn't we try to get the students onboard first? Is it that difficult to get students' attention? Maybe we could sponsor an FS based event in college Tech. meets. Students will be looking around for interesting things, and they can find stuff about FS for themselves. Are people neglecting the "attention first, ideology later" option because they think it is on the wrong side of "ends / means" argument? Is it considered too *ahem* inappropriate to be discussed on this list? Bala.

6 6

[Fsf-friends] Petition to make GoK to accept Open Debate on Bangalore One project
by Venkat Kumaraswamy 23 Mar '05

23 Mar '05

Dear Friends, I have just read and signed the online petition: "GoK to accept Open Debate on Bangalore One Project" hosted on the web by PetitionOnline.com, the free online petition service, at: http://www.PetitionOnline.com/19562006/ I personally agree with what this petition says, and I think you might agree, too. If you can spare a moment, please take a look, and consider signing yourself. Best wishes, Venkatappa M. Kumaraswamy --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.

1 0

Conflicting Reports
by Ramanraj K 23 Mar '05

23 Mar '05

There are too many conflicting reports. We should wait for an authoritative source to publish the contents of the Bill. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: Yet another shameless day in India Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 05:48:22 +0530 From: Nagarjuna G. <nagarjun(a)gnowledge.org> To: Ramanraj K <ramanraj.k(a)gmail.com> CC: in-parl(a)ffii.org References: <424034D3.3070503(a)gmail.com> On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 08:38:03PM +0530, Ramanraj K wrote: > http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/000200503222001.htm > > > Lok Sabha passes Patents Bill > ...The Bill provides for product patents in drugs, agri-products and > embedded software... > The above report is wrong: The reports say that "patenting of software embedded with hardware" is dropped from the ordinance. That is what we demanded. "According an Indian pharma company The new look patent law takes steps to ensure that available drugs t leave the market and keeps embedded software out of the patent ambit. Key provisions that enable recognition of product patents for pharmaceuticals and food, in line with committments to the WTO, have the official added. been accepted,donofficial," http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=66980 "It has also decided to exclude embedded software from the ambit of the product patent regime." http://inhome.rediff.com/money/2005/mar/22patent.htm "In addition, patenting of software embedded with hardware, introduced in the Ordinance, has been dropped. Left parties had objected to software patenting on the ground that it might give rise to foreign multinational monopolies." http://www.financialexpress.com/fe_full_story.php?content_id=85839 Nagarjuna

1 0

NEWS: Government wins over left on Patents Bill
by Frederick Noronha (FN) 22 Mar '05

22 Mar '05

http://in.news.yahoo.com//050322/43/2kbwt.html Tuesday March 22, 6:43 PM Government wins over left on Patents Bill By Indo-Asian News Service New Delhi, March 22 (IANS) The government scored a major victory in parliament Tuesday, winning the support of its left allies on the controversial Patents Bill, even as the main opposition Bharatiya Janata Party insisted the measure be examined by a parliamentary committee. The left parties have been vociferously opposing the bill, contending it would result in a steep hike in prices of essential medicines and that some of its provisions were against national interest. The left parties said they would support the bill because the government had accepted 10 of the 12 amendments suggested by them. The amendments relate to areas like definition of inventiveness, new inventions, compulsory licensing, royalty and the raising of objections before the grant of a patent instead of afterwards. The bill was to have been debated and passed Monday but this was deferred to Tuesday to enable the government and the left iron out their differences. Initiating the discussion in the Lok Sabha, Commerce Minister Kamal Nath reiterated the government was only fulfilling an international commitment that had been made on the issue. At the same time, he assured members he would address all the apprehensions raised by them. This did not satisfy the BJP, which insisted the bill be referred to a committee for deeper study. Uday Singh of the BJP alleged that the government was being "unduly influenced by MNCs". Pointing out that 70 percent of anti-AIDS medicines for underdeveloped countries are sourced from India, he said prices would rise sharply if the bill was passed. "The bill will be a let down not only for us, but for those countries also," he maintained. Pawan Kumar Bansal (Congress) contended the government was helpless as the World Trade Organistion had mandated some of the measures. "But the government is taking all measures to protect the interests of the common man and keep the prices of the essential medicines under control," Bansal argued. Members in the Rajya Sabha Tuesday discussed the plight of the farmers in the country. The issue was raised by MPs from Andhra Pradesh, who spoke about increasing suicides by farmers in Andhra Pradesh and elsewhere who fell into a debt trap after their crops failed. _____ _/ ____\____ Frederick Noronha * Freelance Journalist * Goa \ __\/ \ India T +91.832.2409490 M +919822 122436 | | | | \ http://fn.swiki.net http://goabooks.swiki.net |__| |___| / http://www.bytesforall.net http://www.bytesforall.org \/ ----------------------------------------------------- Sign up for low-volume, high-quality news summaries and updates from Goa at http://newsfromgoa.swiki.net * It's free and volunteer-driven.

1 0

NEWS: Communists push passage of India's patent bill
by Frederick Noronha (FN) 22 Mar '05

22 Mar '05

http://in.news.yahoo.com//050322/43/2kbzd.html Communists push passage of India's patent bill By Indo-Asian News Service ADVERTISEMENT New Delhi, March 22 (IANS) A controversial Patent Amendment Bill, that had drawn protests even in African countries as it was feared it would lead to rise in costs of cheaper India-made generic drugs, was passed amid protests in the lower house of parliament. Even as the opposition National Democratic Alliance (NDA) pressed for the bill's reference to a parliamentary panel and staged a walkout, the government managed to get the support of Left parties and secure the passage in the Lok Sabha. "There were five-six areas where we wanted changes. Some safeguards are also in place on life-savings drugs. We are, therefore, supporting the new regime," said Prakash Karat, politburo member of the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M). The bill seeks to replace an ordinance promulgated in December to meet the Jan 1 deadline to recognise product patents, enable the grant of compulsory licences for export of medicines and modify rules on exclusive marketing rights. These provisions are part of India's commitment to the World Trade Organisation (WTO) under the pact on Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights, but there were fears mainly over its likely impact on prices of drugs and medicines, especially those for AIDS. The patent bill originally had an enabling provision that required poor nations with insufficient or no manufacturing capacity to grant compulsory licence to Indian companies for import of drugs to meet emergent public health situations. This provision has now been amended to help these least developed countries, a number of them in Africa. They are no longer required to issue a compulsory licence to an Indian firm to import patented drugs from the country. The Indian government can allow such exports even if the importing country merely authorises or notifies its requirement. Other changes relate to areas like definition of inventiveness, new inventions, royalty and the raising of objections before the grant of a patent instead of afterwards. The bill was to have been debated and passed Monday but this was deferred to Tuesday to enable the government and the left iron out their differences. Commerce and Industry Minister Kamal Nath said the new legislation would not affect domestic prices as 97 percent of the drugs in the Indian market were already off patents, including 350 live-saving essential drugs. But rights groups said a patient of AIDS in poor countries who pays some $20 a month for treatment with generic medicine could end up coughing up $395 for the branded anti-retroviral drugs because of some provisions in the new legislation. There were protest marches in Tanzania, Kenya and Uganda, countries with large numbers of HIV/AIDS patients, who feared higher cost of drugs following passage of the patent bill in India. "The life and health of hundreds of thousands of people globally depends on the decisions taken in India this week," said Ellen 't Hoen of the Paris-based Doctors Without Borders, a health and medical aid group. Hoen, who had been gathering support in India against the new legislation, said close to 50 percent of an estimated 700,000 HIV patients in poor and developing countries depend on Indian drugs for treatment. But the commerce minister said: "The 12 anti retro-viral drugs, mostly used for AIDS and made in India, cannot be patented. They are pre-1995 inventions. India will continue to manufacture, use and export them without hindrance." The bill now goes to the Rajya Sabha, the upper house, before going to the president for signature for it to become law. _____ _/ ____\____ Frederick Noronha * Freelance Journalist * Goa \ __\/ \ India T +91.832.2409490 M +919822 122436 | | | | \ http://fn.swiki.net http://goabooks.swiki.net |__| |___| / http://www.bytesforall.net http://www.bytesforall.org \/ ----------------------------------------------------- Sign up for low-volume, high-quality news summaries and updates from Goa at http://newsfromgoa.swiki.net * It's free and volunteer-driven.

1 0

Jailed for using a nonstandard browser
by Praveen A 22 Mar '05

22 Mar '05

Jailed for using a nonstandard browser <quote> A Londonder made a tsnuami-relief donation using lynx -- a text-based browser used by the blind, Unix-users and others -- on Sun's Solaris operating system. The site-operator decided that this "unusual" event in the system log indicated a hack-attempt, and the police broke down the donor's door and arrested him. </quote> http://www.boingboing.net/2005/01/27/jailed_for_using_a_n.html -- "There is no system but GNU, and Linux is one of its kernels." A proud GNU user http://www.gnu.org http://www.edathanattukara.com My Weblog at http://www.livejournal.com/users/pravi Visit me at http://www.pravi.tk Rediscover the web ! Get firefox at http://www.getfirefox.com Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

Fsf-friends March 2005