[Reader-list] Invitation: Sarai.txt 1.2

[Aarti]

Dear All,

Over the last six months, a broadsheet is being explored at Sarai for 
the circulation of research work being done at and around, and passing 
through Sarai.

Welcome to the text version of the bimonthly Sarai TXT, a single sheet 
publication!

You are invited to participate in discussions around themes which have 
been explored so far, on the reader list, and to write to the broadsheet 
collective with feedback, ideas and suggestions.

Also, for the joy of holding a print format in your hands (in colour!) 
do write to us!!

Looking forward,
the Broadhseet Collective

write to: broadsheet at sarai.net


_____________________________________________________________________________ 


Sarai txt 1.2
*COPY*

15 December - 15 February, 2005

Content of the text version:
(Does not include the poster and back page)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 


SIDE 01
- This Copy is Yours!
- A Question of Standards (by Ravi Agarwal)

SIDE 02
- In Bagdadh, Dreaming of Cairo / Essay Review / Reimagining the Public 
Domain / David Lange
by Smriti Vohra
- Photocopying (a definitional play)
- Courtspeak: Zee Telefilms Ltd v Sundial Communications Pvt. Ltd.
- FLOSS is not just good for teeth / Free, Libre and Open Source 
Explained (finally) in Simple English!
- The School of Good Copying
- To Copy Writings
- Media Spaces: Video Parlours in the city (Mayur Suresh, researcher, 
PPHP, Sarai)
- Imitating Life: Painting fish
- Circular: Prototypes
- Terminator Seeds

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 


SIDE 01:

- This Copy is Yours

Pronunciation: 'kâpee

[A]bstract out of, act like, act out, adopt, affect, alternate, ape, 
appear like, approach, appropriate, approximate, arrange, autograph 
[B]ack number, backup, be like, be redolent of, bear resemblance, beat, 
block print, blueprint, borrow, bring to mind, buy, [C]all to mind, call 
up, carbon copy, caricaturise, chalk out, change, chart, chorus, clone, 
collage, collect, color, come again, come close, come near, companion 
(be/create a), compare with, compose, copy out, correspond, counterfeit, 
counterpart (make), crosshatch, [D]aub, delineate, depict, derive from, 
design, diagram, display, ditto (do), do a repeat, do again, do like, do 
over, document, doodle, double, draft, draw, draw up, dupe, duplicate, 
[E]cho, edit, effigy (make), elevate, emulate, enact, enface, engrave, 
engross (yourself), essay, evoke, exact counterpart (make), example, 
exchange, [F]abricate, facsimile, fair copy, fake, favor, fellow, 
fiction, figure, fill-in, follow, forge, [G]eminate, ghostwrite, go 
like, graph, [H]atch, hoke up, [I]conise, identical same (try), idolise, 
illuminated (be), illustrate, imagine, imitate, impersonate, impressed 
(be), impression (form), imprint, infect, inscribe, issue, [K]nockoff, 
[L]ibrary (make own), like, look like, [M]ake commodity, make a 
recension, make like, make out, make over, make use of, masquerade as, 
match, mate, microcopy, microfilm, mime, mimic, miniaturise, mirror, 
mock, model, multiply by two, music (set to), [N]early reproduce, news 
item (use as), next best thing (try and find), not tell apart, notate, 
number, [O]utline, [P]aint, paint a picture, pantomime, parallel, 
paraphrase, parody, parrot, part, partake of, pass for, pattern, pen 
down, perform, personate, photocopy, photograph, photostat, picturize, 
piece, pinch, pirate, plagiarize, play, play a part, plot, portray, pose 
as, pretend to be, print, printout, produce, profile, project, proxy 
for, push the pen, put in writing, [Q]uadruplicate, quote, [R]eading 
matter (treat as), rebuild, recense, reconstitute, reconstruct, record, 
re-create, re-creation, redesign, redo, redouble, reduplicate, 
reestablish, refashion, reflect, re-form, refound, regenerate, 
regurgitate, reincarnate, reinstitute, reissue, relief, remake, remind 
one of, renew, renovate, reorganise, repeat, replace, replicate, 
represent, reprint, reproduce, resemble, reserve, reshape, restore, 
restructure, resurrect, resurrection, revise, revive, rewrite, rough 
out, rub, [S]ample, savor of, say again, scoop, score, scratch, screed 
(make), script, seem like, sell, shade, shadow, sign, simulate, sketch, 
smack of, sound like, sow, spill ink on, spitting image (create), spoil 
paper, stack it up, steal, stencil, sub, substitute, suggest, 
superscribe, surrogate, [T]able, take, take after, take off, take on, 
take over, the same (do), tint, token, trace, trade, transcribe, 
triplicate, twin, type, [U]nderstudy, utilise, [V]ersion, very image 
(create), very picture (create), very same (create), [W]all paint, work, 
write down, write out, [X]erox


"The truth is, that the natives of that Monarchy [the Mughals] are the 
best apes for imitation in the world, so full of ingenuity, that they 
will make any new thing by pattern, how hard soever it may seem to be 
done; and therefore it is no marvel if the natives there make shoes, 
boots, clothes, linen, band, and cuff in our English fashion, which are 
all of them very much different fro their fashions and habits, and yet 
them make them all exceedingly neat."

Terry, Voyage to the East Indies, 1655 ed.
Quoted in Ashan Jan Qaisar's 'The Indian Response to European Technology 
and Culture, AD 1498 - 1707', OUP, 1982


***

- A Question of Standards (by Ravi Agarwal)

What do standards mean? And I want to raise questions on environmental 
norms, what the assumptions are, what the dynamics are and what kind of 
imaginations they might stop. In thinking through the language and 
framework of standards, we could loose other ways of looking at the 
environment and ecology. This is an increasing concern for me as an 
environmental activist (involved as I am in several standard processes) 
– why things don't happen and why things don't work and why we aren't 
doing things in a different way.

*A Definition*

Standards are normally understood as a proces of standardising 
technology. So they are, essentially, a technology-oriented take on 
something. They consider, for instance, how much Carbon Dioxide or Lead 
is is release in a certain process. That is, you take one single 
pollutant and set a standard for it. This is called an Ambient Standard. 
Then, there is the Source Standard, which looks at the source of the 
pollutant and therefore makes it possible to regulate the source, eg a 
car, in reference to the set up norm.

*A technical question? Or a question of technique?*

The truth is, these standards are actually unclear. There is no Ambient 
Air Quality Standard per say. But we do have Source Standards. And the 
calculation of the Ambient Standard from the Source Standard requires 
mathematical modeling. Normally to set a Source Standard is to regulate 
a source. Eg, if a thermal power plant is set up, it will be checked 
with a meter to guage if norms are being followed. The presumption here 
is that these norms are health based standards.

However, any pollutant is bound to produce risk. So there's something 
called the acceptable risk, the first grey area of the world of 
standards. If an element causes cancer in one person in a million, it is 
an acceptable risk. This is determined through dose response, that is, 
how much dose it will take for a “normal” human being to be affected. 
This is guaged through lab experiments. If you give 20 times the legally 
permissible dose to a hundred hamsters, how much dose will it take to 
kill fifty of them? Following this far from fool proof cause and effect 
relationship, the classification of the pollutant is negotiated.

*The standard simulacrum*

Both the determination and implementation of standards involves the 
mobilisation of a huge bureaucracy and scientific institutes, with their 
own conflicting interests. The latter is important to consider – it 
means industrial interests would naturally tend towards not raising 
standards too high. Standards drive technology – technology has to be 
upgraded to comply with the standards.

Moreover, different countries follow different standards. We don't have 
global standards because costs are not uniform across nations. The WHO 
sets certain standards, but the European standards are higher. This sets 
up a differential, which in turn determines the flow of technology, 
dumping. This, along with being seen as an effect of the standards, 
needs to be considered as an important influence in the setting of 
standards. Because the standards that are set are according to the best 
available technology with acceptable cost in a country. And there is 
never any clear definition of what constitutes “available technology”.

Thus constructed, standards drive laws as well as implementation 
procedures. Compliance with standards implies the source is 
environmentally safe. They become the basis for all kinds of 
environmental action. If you make yourself susceptible by 
non-compliance, you risk being taken to court by environmentalists.

*The after-effects*

Standards affect the cost of technology and, so, how the industry looks 
at itslef. They help frame the fundamentals of environmental policy 
making, on which decisions are made. They impact investment and 
regulation.They even impact how we look at our own health.

There is a bruhaha of the scientificity of standards. But actually it's 
about hard core cause and effect science and a lot of political 
negotiation. And we accept these daily as norms. We start accepting 
generalisations. Standards become the drivers – “If we accept these”, we 
think, “everything will fall in place”. Generalisation becomes a known 
trajectory of what we can accept, and what we find acceptable. The 
conflict is fundamental, because it deals with life itself. This is the 
reason why one makes generalisations in the first place.

*Imagining alternatives*

Lets consider two cases.

*The first*

We may talk of a certain standard for the quality of food. But 
contamination may happen at any stage – in production (agriculture), in 
transportation, in retail marketing, or at the level of consumer 
awareness. How can we deal with this in an integrated manner when 
institutions are not talking to one another, in the absence of a common 
language?

*The second*

The cost of oil kept rising. There was an idea that if this continued, 
there may be some boost to looking at renewable sources of energy. But 
established markets will never let prices rise and give rise to a 
situation where the manufacturer can't cope, and consumers have to 
switch to an alternative like bicycles. There will always be a 
technological innovation to stop that from happening. Even if it means 
tandards that cars need to comply with are raised.

We want to look at renewable energy as an option, but there are no 
standards for it. Standard driven cost doesn't encourage alternative 
approaches, and alternative approaches can't be a function of market 
driven costs. Without actually focusing on alternatives, all one 
provides are technical alternatives, which do not gain momentum.

There is an obvious disconnect here. Our imagination for the environment 
seems to be the compliance of certain standards. Our imagination of the 
environment and our solutions get based on technical norms. We are 
ecological beings, yet our connect is technical.

For instance, if we start working on the River Yamuna, there is no other 
frame than that of the Yamuna being polluted, of not being in a 
condition in keeping with the accepted environmental standards. And yet, 
these standards are set by a body of experts who have no relationship to 
what they are talking about. Norms are being set up without any 
condition or experiene as part of the understanding.

This is a sharp separation between what governs our life and the kind of 
experience that sets this on our plate. How can we save a river if it 
isn't in our imagination? People say Thames is clean. That's because 
they can see it. People don't see the Yamuna.

The dynamics of urban issues almost have a known trajectory of where 
they will be located. And in trying to locate the personal connection of 
the larger question of culture and web of life, and the ecological 
space, there is very little common language.

Written reproduction of an oral presentation by Ravi Agarwal in the 
Urban Environment Workshop held at SARAI on the 3rd and 4th November, 
2004. Ravi Agarwal is an environmental activist and photographer. Ideas 
in this presentation are part of a forthcoming article by him in the 
Sarai Reader 05, “Bare Acts”.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

SIDE 02
- In Bagdadh, Dreaming of Cairo / Essay Review / by Smriti Vohra

'Reimagining the Public Domain' by David Lange

(from Law and Contemporary Problems, Vol. 66, pp. 463-83)

This article is also available at 
http://www.law.duke.edu/journals/66LCPLange

The author is Professor of Law, Duke University. A preliminary footnote 
to the article declares: "Copyright in this work is hereby disclaimed 
and abandoned."

Paolo Coelho's bestselling book /The Alchemist/ presents the (ironic) 
notion that one can wander in delusion all over the world in search of 
whatever one is looking for, or the fulfillment of a need, when in 
actuality everything one requires is right where one is, within easy 
reach, in one's own life and thinking. The core idea of Coelho's 
narrative, which continues to be cited as a modern masterpiece of 
inspirational literature, is strikingly similar to a long Sufi parable 
in Jalaluddin Rumi's /Masnavi, /titled 'In Baghdad, dreaming of Cairo: 
in Cairo, dreaming of Baghdad'. It presents the idea of a man who goes 
on a journey seeking the buried treasure he saw in a dream.

Such a linking of texts in the mind of the reader may be purely 
hypothetical, but it proves how conditioned we are to established 
notions of authorship and "transformative appropriations", to borrow a 
term from the essay reviewed here. David Lange seeks to redefine the 
public domain and examine its relations with creativity, imagination and 
rights. He categorically states that he wants the public domain, however 
it may be defined, to secure the "elemental aspirations" that are innate 
to human beings: 'to think and to imagine, to remember and to 
appropriate, to play and to create'. He acknowledges that the term 
'public domain' is elastic and inexact, and can be perhaps most usefully 
seen as a commons, set off against fences that "delimit the interests of 
individual rights holders"; this definition is invaluable for the 
purposes of imagining a politics of the commons that structures the 
operations of cyberspace.

Thus, the public domain contests the "expansionism" of intellectual 
property regimes, which are "boundary-fixing" encroachments upon the 
imagination, and a means of extracting payment for creativity and 
creative expression.

Lange demands a radical re-conceptualisation and reconfiguration of the 
public domain itself. It has to be envisioned as autonomous, having an 
affirmative existence of its own, and strengthened accordingly. "Reform" 
of the public domain is not enough: there should be "revolution". We are 
urged to envision the public domain "as if it were a status like 
citizenship, but a citizenship arising from the exercise of creative 
imagination rather than as a concomitant of birth". This citizenship 
confers protection, not merely recognition or definition. The public 
domain should be understood as an affirmative source of entitlements 
capable of "deployment" as, when and where required, against 
encroachments upon the creative imagination by intellectual property 
regimes.

According to Lange, imagination and its parameters form the central 
focus, reach and scope of the public domain. He asks whether 
"imagination" is distinct from "action", quoting from an article by Jed 
Rubenfeld in the /Yale Law Journal/: "The freedom of imagination demands 
that people be free to exercise their imagination. It is not a freedom 
to do what one imagines." Violence, intentional misrepresentation, 
misinformation, do not qualify. Additionally, when copyright law bars 
simple piracy, it does not punish infringers for exercising their 
imagination. It punishes them for failing to exercise their 
imagination--for failing to add any imaginative content to the copied 
material. By Rubenfeld's standard, peer-to-peer filesharing in the 
Napster mode does not qualify as an exercise of imagination, but Lange 
feels that it does indeed, and moreover, does so in a "substantial" manner.

He also says that creativity and appropriation are "as inseparable as 
creativity and memory"; in his opinion, "they should remain so, at 
whatever cost may follow to whatever other belief systems (including 
copyright) may thus be obliged to stand aside".Copyright is omnipresent, 
and is also correspondingly over-extended. It is "fundamentally wrong" 
to insist that children internalise the proprietary and moral values of 
the copyright system, as proprietary values inevitably encroach upon the 
formation and growth of creativity in young minds. He cites the example 
of Helen Keller, whose early efforts at creative self-expression were 
damaged "irreparably" by accusations of plagiarism (regarding a story 
she had composed) leveled against her by her mentor Michael Anagnos, the 
director of the Perkins Institute for the Blind in Boston, that Keller 
attended.

Lange discusses copyright and the doctrine of fair use in terms of what 
he calls "transformative" or "creative" appropriations, reminding us 
that there may always be some level of functional and aesthetic 
"equivalency" between two works. Creative appropriations require 
affirmative protections. He defines piracy as "an appropriation 
unmotivated by any creative exercise, including an exercise of the 
creative imagination".

Somewhat ambiguously, he defines appropriation as "creative" (and 
thereby qualifying as an exercise of the creative imagination) "when we 
see in it the qualities or attributes we recognise in conceptual art of 
any kind".

Lange concludes his essay by citing the example of a poem by Anne Frank, 
written in Amsterdam to her friend Henny on the occasion of the latter's 
birthday party in 1940: "Dear Henny / Pluck roses on earth / and forget 
me not." It was later discovered that this poem appeared to have been 
"appropriated" verbatim from an anthology of poetry widely available in 
the Netherlands at that time. Lange asks if, by the standards of 
contemporary copyright doctrines, Anne Frank could be classified as a 
creator, an author, a plagiarist, a pirate, a thief. He declares that it 
is wrong for copyright to intrude into private lives, wrong to measure 
creativity by the standards of copyright. He states unequivocally that 
it is wrong to lay impediments (moral, intellectual, legal) before 
exercises of the imagination, "whether great or small". We have to 
ensure that proprietary modes do not "rob us of this vital aspect of our 
citizenship: the right to think as we please and to speak as we think".



***

- Photocopying (a definitional play)

Photocopying is a process which makes paper 
<http://www.free-definition.com/Paper.html> copies of documents and 
other visual images. The machine that performs this function is called a 
photocopier. A high contrast electrostatic image copy is created on a 
drum and then a fusible plastic powder (called toner) is transferred to 
regular paper, heated and then fused into the paper. In recent years, 
photocopiers have adopted digital technology, with the copier 
effectively consisting of an integrated scanner 
<http://www.free-definition.com/Scanner-%28computing%29.html> and laser 
printer <http://www.free-definition.com/Laser-printer.html>.


1. Place the paper on the dark surface.

2. Close the top.

3. Press the 'START' button.

4. Wait as green bands of light travel across the page.

5. Check if another sheet is sliding out into the tray, transformed
into an exact copy of the original.

6. Take copy.

***

- Courtspeak: Zee Telefilms Ltd v Sundial Communications Pvt. Ltd.

Zee telefilms Ltd. v. Sundial Comminucations Pvt. Ltd.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICIARE AT BOMBAY

Zee Telefilms Ltd & Anr.......Appellants

Versus

Sundial Communications Pvt. Ltd & Ors.......Respondents

Shah and Deshmukh, Judges

Decided on March 27, 2003

Held: Having considered the two works involved in this case not 
hypocritically and with meticulous scrutiny, and by observations and 
impressions of the average vewier, there are striking similarities in 
the two works which cannot, in the light of the material places on 
record, be said to constitute mere chance. The only inference that can 
be drawn from the material available on record is unlawful copying of 
the plaintiff's original work.

Notes from the judgement:

Sundial Communications is a company engaged in television programming, 
video programming, television serials, etc. In January 2002 it worked 
out an initial concept montage for a TV serial titled 'Kanhaiya' and 
presented it to ZEE Telefims Ltd. The latter expressed an interest in 
producing the serial, and Sundial Communications produced a pilot by 
October 2002. The pilot was sent to Star TV, Sony TV, and Sahara, along 
with Zee. For protection, both the initial concept and the pilot were 
registered with the Film and Writers Association, and the title 
registered with the Film Producers Association.

Initial negotiations fell through and consequently Sundial entered into 
discussions with Sony Entertainment Television. However, they learnt 
soon after that ZEE Telefilms was producing a show titled Krish 
Kanhaiya, which seemed to be based on the concept of Kanhaiya. Upon 
hearing of the prospective production by Zee, Sony Television refused to 
sign a contract with Sundial. Hence Sundial took ZEE Telefilms to court 
for breach of confidentiality, copyright infringement and for passing 
off Sundial's work as their own.


In examining the question of whether the defendant's work violated the 
plaintiff's copyright, the court considered, “One of the surest and the 
safest tests to determine whether or not there has been a violation of 
copyright is to see if the reader, spectator or the viewer after having 
read or seen both the works is clearly of the opinion and gets an 
unmistakable impression that the subsequent work appears to be a copy of 
the original.”


When this principle was applied to the case, the following emerged:

KK Krish Kanhaiyya(Plaintiff) v. K, Kanhaiyya (Defendant).

KK: Family is rich and dysfunctional / K: Family is rich and dysfunctional

KK: The Main woman protagonist (stepmother), most affected by the 
environment in the house, prays for help to
God / K: Main woman protagonist Dadi Ma, most affected by environment in 
the house, prays for help to God (Lord Krishna).

KK: The prayer is answered soon by the arrival of Kanhaiyya / K: The 
prayer is answered soon by the arrival of Kanhiayya.

KK: God is in Bal Krishna form / K: God is in Child Form.

KK: Their interaction with Kanhaiyya is heartwarming, consoling and 
gives some support to the main woman protagonist / K: The interaction 
with Kanhaiyya is heartwarming, consoling and gives some support to the 
main woman protagonist.

KK: Kanhiayya attaches himself to the seeker of help / K: Kanhaiyya 
attaches himself to the seeker of help.

KK: Opening sequence includes is flute music, and instruction normally 
associated with Lord Krishna / K: Opening sequence starts with rendition 
to Lord Krishna.

KK: Opening title has a prominent peacock feather and the character of 
Lord Krishna, and the title Krish Kanhaiyya written across it / K: The 
opening title has a peacock feather with the main character's face and 
Kanhaiyya written all across it. The audio includes flute music and 
shlokas from the Gita.

In both serials the father is a businessman with three children. In KK, 
the elder son is a sportsman and a footballer, whereas in K the elder 
son is a cricketer. In the former, the second child is a budding 
scientist and does not sleep all night, whereas in the defendant's 
serial the second child is a computer geek who does not sleep all night 
and spends too much time on the computer. In Krish Kanhaiyya, the 
youngest child is a daughter and talks to people through her doll, 
whereas in the defendant's serial the youngest child is also a daughter 
and talks in the third person. The servants in both households also have 
similar characteristics.


After viewing both films, the court reasoned, “...a viewer would 
definitely form an opinion or would get a dominant impression that the 
defendant's serial has been based on or been taken from the original 
work of the plaintiffs. It is true that there are some dissimilarities 
in the manner of presentation which are highlighted by the learned 
counsel for the defendants in his arguments. However, we think that 
these dissimilarities are trivial and insignificant. To quote the words 
of the learned judge Hand in Sheldon v. Metro Goldwyn Picture 
Corporation (1993), 8/n F 2^nd 49, 'It is enough that substantial parts 
were lifted. No playwright can excuse wrong for showing how much of his 
work he did not private'.”

***

- FLOSS is not just good for teeth / Free, Libre and Open Source 
Explained (finally) in Simple English!

"Why do they call it 'FLOSS' when it doesn't clean your teeth?"

Are you a non-nerd, a human being who happens to use computers without 
living inside them? Does that make you curious to find out what the buzz 
regarding open source and free software is all about? What's in it for 
you? Does it work? Is it fun and easy to use? How is it made and who 
makes it? And how 'free' or 'open' is it, really? Have you looked long 
and hard for answers to questions like these in plain English? If that's 
the case, 'FLOSS is not just good for teeth' could be just what you are 
looking for.

Impress your techie buddies with the fact that you care for your kernel, 
and open yourself to a whole new world of concepts that offer 
challenging and exciting ideas about creativity, collaboration and 
coding. 'Floss' geeks, make yourselves understood to other human beings 
- download and distribute 'FLOSS is not just good for teeth' to friends, 
family and colleagues, so they can finally know and appreciate what 
keeps you awake while they sleep.

'FLOSS is not just good for teeth' is a collaboratively produced 
introduction to the concepts that underlie free and open source 
software, written specially for the non-technical reader, at the Sarai 
Programme (www.sarai.net) of the Centre for the Study of Developing 
Societies, Delhi.

Visit
http://www.sarai.net/floss_book.pdf
for free downloads

Produced at the Media Lab, Sarai-CSDS (Delhi) as part of 'Towards a 
Culture of Open Networks' (http://opencultures.org), with support from 
the EU-India Economic Cross-Cultural Programme.

***

- The School of Good Copying

The general syllabus for art students focuses on the realistic style of 
painting under the program which is authorized by the Russian Academy of 
Art.

The program consists of work in still life, portraits, nudes, images of 
the interior of the institute halls, and antique reliefs found in the 
halls of the museum of sculpture. The study of figures include a 
portrait, an image of a nude and anatomic figures. When weather permits, 
primarily in June and July, these studies are taken outdoors and works 
created 'a la prima' or, as is more commonly known, plein air.

The art of copying is performed by students in the 3rd and 6th study 
level. Depending on the chosen subject (an old Russian work or painting) 
the student may produce an icon or perhaps an oil painting. The student 
may choose a work from either the Russian State Museum, The Hermitage, 
or in the halls of the Academy itself. Occasionally, a
student may decide to produce a copy of one of the works which is 
currently under restoration.

All phases in the production of a copy are conducted under the 
supervision of the instructors of the restoration
faculty.

<http://artroots.com/ra/restoration/restorshop.htm>

***

- To Copy Writings

Take a piece of unsized paper exactly of the size of the paper to be 
copied. Moisten it with water, or with the following liquid: Take of 
distilled vinegar, 2 lbs.; dissolve it in 1 oz. of boracic acid; then 
take 4 oz. of oyster shells calcined to whiteness, and carefully freed 
from their brown crust; put them into the vinegar, shake the mixture 
frequently for 24 hours, then let it stand till it deposits its 
sediment; filter the clear part through unsized paper into a glass 
vessel; then add 2 oz. of the best Aleppo galls bruised, and place the 
liquor in a warm place; shake it frequently for 24 hours, then filter 
the liquor again through unsized paper, and add to it after filtration, 
1 qt., ale measure, of pure water. It must then stand 24 hours, and be 
filtered again, if it shows a disposition to deposit any sediment, which 
it generally does. When the paper has been wet with this liquid, put it 
between 2 thick unsized papers to absorb the superfluous moisture; then 
lay it over the writing to be copied, and put a piece of clean 
writing-paper above it. Put the whole on the board of a rolling-press, 
and press them through the rolls, as is done in printing copperplates, 
and a copy of the writing will appear on both sides of the thin 
moistened paper, on one side in a reversed order and direction, but on 
the other side in the natural order and direction of the lines.

--From the Household Cyclopedia of General Information (1881)

<http://www.publicbookshelf.com/public_html/The_Household_Cyclopedia_of_General_Information/firstcopy_cdc.html> 


***

- Media Spaces: Video Parlours in the city (Mayur Suresh, researcher, 
PPHP, Sarai)


Starting Up

Prabhu, a video library owner in the Austin town in Bangalore,
says, “We were always talking about movies. Me and my friend. So
we bought one VCR player and that time it was in demand and we
started hiring it out. We became partners, thinking, 'Why don't we
open a library with that?' We invested a little money, Rs 5000,
and bought some cassettes.

"One other guy next to Galaxy theatre, Sagar King his place is
called, helped us out. We initially stocked 300 cassettes. Since
we knew that guy, we took from his shop whatever extra cassettes
he had. I bought a VCP and my partner bought a VCP. And we said
okay, we are partners. If one of us rents out something, we share
the profits; and if both of us rent out something, we share the
profit."

"We spoke to a guy who had an egg shop. We told him, "Give us some
place. We will pay you whatever rent you want. We'll have a video
cassette shop." He was very happy, at his shop being partly
converted to a cassette shop.

"The Sagar King guy said, 'Okay, I'll give you 300 tapes, and in
return you have to give me Rs 1 per tape everyday.' So it was Rs
300 every day. No matter if ten cassettes went out or twenty went
out. It was very good.

"We took all the 300 tapes, kept them at the shop, and then we
started distributing pamphlets everywhere. The response was
excellent. Whenever there were new movies, everyone wanted them.
We used to run, get the movies, give them. Business traveled like
anything. We had a fantastic business immediately, because we were
the first people to start. From far away places people used to
come for English Hindi, Tamil films, and all that.
"Later we said that this money was not enough, so we took another
partner. And then we took the whole egg shop on rent. The egg shop
man also joined us as a partner. So then we started off the
full-fledged cassettes shop. Business was very good. We went on
for four-five years like that.”

Video with Chai

When PK started his video parlour in the late '80s, he was visited
by the police a number of times. But he says that the police also
had no idea of how or if they were empowered to regulate the video
parlour.

“What kind of problems do I have? Yes…mainly police. They used to
come and say 'Why you are showing this? What permission have you
got?'

"In the beginning there were no rules, no permission, so we said
that we do not know what permission we are supposed to have.

"In fact, this idea came to me was because I was running a
restaurant. I was selling tea, coffee, bonda, snacks. In the dull
hours there were hardly any people, and there just was a radio or
a gramophone to entertain the customers. Then the bright idea come
to our mind to get a TV and show video movies.

"So when the video was on in the restaurant and there were regular
tables and chairs, people used to drink coffee and eat snacks and
watch the movie freely. Somebody would watch for ten minutes, half
an hour, two hours. Some crazy people might watch for the entire
three hours, stretching out one coffee. So then we observed that
the crowd started growing steadily. Within one month we realised
that we had more customers, and when we started the movie, it was
house full. People used to sit for the full three hours, but we
didn't do much business.

"Then slowly it came to our minds to set a condition that if you
order one thing, you cannot sit for more than one hour. So if you
wanted to see the whole picture for three hours, you had to order
three times.

"There were chairs on both sides and half the people were sitting
ulta. So, slowly we thought, let us forget the benches and let
everyone face the TV side, and we served them only coffee in the
hand. We closed down the puri bhaaji and heavy snacks, for which
you require a table, and slowly, slowly, we increased the coffee
charge also, and then slowly, slowly we thought, you give us a
flat Rs 10 for sitting here, forget coffee. So this is how it all
started. "


http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/commons-law/2004-August/001837.html


Mayur Suresh

mayur at sarai.net <ayur at sarai.net>

Mayur is a researcher with the PPHP (Publics and Practices in the 
History of the Present) project, Sarai


***

- Imitating Life: Painting fish

Fish must be painted swimming and darting with vitality. They should 
appear startled by a shadow, or they should be floating idly, opening 
and closing their mouths. As they float on the surface, dive or glide 
through the weeds, the clear waters envelop them or ripple off them. 
Deep in one's heart, one envies them their pleasure. As with human 
beings, they should have idea/meaning (i). If one fails to render this 
aspect of their divine quality and merely copies their appearance, even 
painted in a mountain stream or torrent the fish will look as dead as on 
a platter.

Hsu Hsi, The Mustard Seed Garden Manual of Painting (17th century)

***

- Circular: Prototypes

The R&D wing developed a prototype color photocopier to copy content 
displayed on a PC monitor two years ago. The prototype measures about 
5x9 cm and features a colour LCD display and a photosensitive layer. 
When a user touches the screen and presses a button, the portion touched 
is copied. However there have been no responses to the invitation for 
tenders to make copies of this prototype. A prototype cannot stand 
alone. A meeting if hereby scheduled for the third of next month to 
decide the fate of the aforementioned device.

***

- Terminator Seeds

A seed is a source or beginning; a germ; a propogative part of a plant. 
It is also an offspring, a progeny. Seeds are borne by plants. They are 
borne, and then dispersed. Some seeds are ensconsed safely in fleshy 
fruits, while some are hard and nutty. Some are winged, and travel the 
wind currents and gentle breezes, possibly making home on a distant 
mountain slope or fertile valley. Others rely on being carried away, 
with their fruit, far from their progenitor by the agency of animals. 
Some seeds are fleshy themselves, and can be eaten. Some of these do not 
get eaten and sprout into new trees. And some seeds are so hard and 
tough, that they can be used to make jewellery.

Each seed, a carrier of life, develops into the plant it is borne of. 
Seeds can lie dormant for a long time, till they find conditions ripe 
for their germination. They are inactive in their dry state. In a moist 
environment, they absorb water and swell. A root begins to grow out of 
the seed, a stem emerges as well. With the stem, the seed begins to lift 
out of the ground. Soon, it unfolds its seed leaves, the cotyledons. 
These open to catch the sunlight. Between them, a bud gives promise that 
true leaves will soon appear. And with the opening of true leaves, the 
plant is off to a good start.

Seeds multiply themselves, so human beings find seeds immensely 
valueable. And because seeds have this perfected ability to make more of 
themselves, people take on different roles vis-a-vis 'cultivating' them. 
Some people only breed them - that is, enhance their qualities over 
generations through different techniques, specifically genetic 
modification. Other people produce, breed and conserve seeds. These are 
farmers, who need to sow part of the seeds they produce to grow the next 
generation of crops. Their area of influence, like their resources, are 
usually local and small scale.

Both rely on and lay claim to the reproductive value of the seed. Since 
the farmer is also a breeder, the definition of the breeder and the 
farmer need to be marked and further differentiated. To negotiate this, 
the question of rights arises - who has what kinds of rights over the 
reproduction of the seeds? For instance, sometimes certain breeders (who 
are also big corporations) are allowed to extract fees from farmers and 
other breeders who want to use new seeds. With rights, there come 
different forms of infringement and methods of compensation for the 
holders of the rights. So, if the breeders' seeds, being used by farmer 
A are carried by wind to the neighbouring farmer B's field, farmer B may 
be disallowed from sell his yield that year. And because farmer A is 
bound by terms and conditions to the breeder, he would also be barred 
from selling or giving his seeds to any other.

In addition, a seed's functions also get redefined. When seeds are 
cultivated, they are not only reused through sowing, but also involve 
different kinds of transactions - exchange, selling and buying, gifting. 
These are forms of dispersal, and they are based on the ability of a 
seed to regenerate, germinate, to reproduce itself. Also, through their 
practice and knowledge, farmers constantly produce new varieties of 
plants specifically suited to the region and area to which they belong. 
This is done by means like cross-fertilisation between varieties, one of 
which may be hardy and pest resistant, and the other which is high 
yielding.

In the new role of the seed, the final redefinition is brought about 
through seeds coded to commit suicide. These are called terminator seeds 
- sterile seeds produced by genetically modified plants. By this means 
of preventing farmers from reusing the seed for future crops, 
reproduction of the seed and the nurturing of the practices around it 
are contained and curtailed.

Binding the creation and circulation of the copy - the seed - becomes a 
precondition for control over domains of knowledge, processes and 
materials.

Notes from proceedings of "New Technologies, Social Knowledge and 
Intellectual Property Law". A Sarai-CSDS and HIVOS workshop (in 
collaboration with Alternative Law Forum, Bangalore), November 2003.

***

[END OF BROADSHEET TEXT VERSION]