- KICTANet - KICTANet

Fwd: [Internet Policy] PassBlue Article on “Multistakeholderism”
by Barrack Otieno 10 Sep '19

10 Sep '19

Listers, Might be of interest. Regards ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: R C via InternetPolicy <internetpolicy(a)elists.isoc.org> Date: Sat, Sep 7, 2019 at 4:11 PM Subject: [Internet Policy] PassBlue Article on “Multistakeholderism” To: <internetpolicy(a)elists.isoc.org> For those interested in the broader topic of “multistakeholderism” and the UN system, the attached article currently appears in the UN-oriented site PassBlue. Roger Cochetti https://www.passblue.com/2019/09/02/they-call-it-multistakeholderism-where-… PassBlue Independent Coverage of the UN WORLDVIEWS <http://passblue.com/category/worldviews/>They Call it Multistakeholderism. Where Does That Leave the UN? September 2, 2019 <https://www.passblue.com/2019/09/02/they-call-it-multistakeholderism-where-…> by Harris Gleckman <https://www.passblue.com/author/harris-gleckman/> The United Nations headquarters showcasing the Sustainable Development summit, September 2015. The essayist, an expert in governance and democracy, bemoans the growing participation of multinational corporations in UN system forums. CIA PAK/UN PHOTO Global governance is slipping away from the United Nations. Whether it is in managing the Internet, where the UN’s governing structure offers only an advisory role for governments; or climate change, where the most exciting actions are now corporate-led partnerships outside the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change; or the Gates Foundation-sponsored Gavi, The Vaccine Alliance, which is in a tug of war with the World Health Assembly on who sets health policy in developing countries, the institutional basis for global decision-making is changing. Where nongovernmental organizations were once the largest nonstate entities attending UN system meetings, transnational corporations have become the biggest players. They participate in well-attended public-private partnership sessions at the UN Conference on Trade and Development, the Human Rights Council and the High-Level Political Forum, the key body for following up on the Sustainable Development Goals. The latest institutional foray is a World Economic Forum-UN partnership <https://www.passblue.com/2019/07/23/as-the-sdgs-falter-the-un-turns-to-the-…>agreement. Under this arrangement, senior UN leaders are invited at national, regional and international levels to interact with forum members, many of whom are actually causing the global problems that the UN system is tasked to fix, such as climate change. These developments are part of a new global governance approach, one in which a team of corporate executives, leaders of civil society organizations, officials from governments and the UN system, academics and other players take on the governance of a specific international challenge. In the economic, social and environmental fields, this governance arrangement is called multistakeholderism, as each new global decision-maker is said to represent a “stakeholder” in an issue. In practice, these governance arrangements can have a role equal to or greater than the one held by the intergovernmental body officially assigned to address a universal problem. These experiments in a new form of global governance and the 2010 report on the Global Redesign Initiative by the World Economic Forum run counter to efforts to enhance a sense of democracy as part of global decision-making. Corporate executives — not leaders of small- and medium-size enterprises, nor microenterprises — are central to these groups and public-private partnerships. Yet these bodies have their own internal governance and constituencies; as a result, they redraft global principles that were agreed on by governments to meet their own, often business-focused, concerns. The selected government officials, those considered sympathetic to the goals of multistakeholders, sit on the board as only one of the decision-makers. At the same time, the other players are elevated to a role in global governance without any democratic basis for their participation. This dynamic is quite different from the one prevalent during the conferences of the 1990s, when civil society organizations, farm and labor organizations, educators, scientists, women and businesses gathered to provide diversified voices to governments, which alone led international decision-making. UN public-private partnerships tend to worsen changes in the relationship between the intergovernmental process and UN secretariat staff members, who act as the administrative arm of a UN entity. Where once the secretary-general and the heads of UN specialized agencies and programs saw themselves — and were seen by UN member governments — as governed by a specific intergovernmental body, now the secretariats act more autonomously. They strike up relationships with multiplayer bodies like the World Economic Forum and corporations without intergovernmental oversight. A result of the increase in institutional ties between the UN and senior corporate executives is that civil society organizations, educators, scientists, women and other social communities have less ability to influence the behavior of the UN bodies and the intergovernmental process. The weakening tie is driven both by outside factors and internal realities. The pressures on the UN system are significant. There is the cumulative effect, for example, of more than 30 years of flat or negative regular budget growth of the UN. As an extension of President Trump’s effort to deconstruct the domestic regulatory state in the United States, his administration is also striving to deconstruct the UN system. Internally, the secretariats perceive that taking relatively autonomous actions is one way to deliver on their generic assignments and to offset the underfunded regular budget by reaching out to potential corporate donors. This increased autonomy is often reflected in more willingness to accept invitations to join a multistakeholder group to “represent” the UN and governments or to invite major corporations to join a secretariat-led multiparty group. These new links can allow corporations to assert that they are working with the UN — albeit without intergovernmental oversight. They can also influence a UN secretariat to frame solutions to global problems in ways that are sensitive to their corporate constituency but not necessarily focused on government expectations or the need for leading the world toward systemic reforms. Of course, the interests of corporations vary. For some consumer-oriented businesses, their increased role in UN operations is a chance to secure a role in creating a global sustainability market for a specific product or service. For other multinationals, particularly those affiliated with the World Economic Forum, it is an opportunity, after the shocks of the 2008 financial crisis, to relegitimate the globalized market in the minds of international and national elites. It does not need to be so. Steps can be taken by governments to reassert leadership in managing globalization and mitigating global environmental crises. These could include a clear definition of conflict of interests to guide secretariats when they partner with a specific enterprise; an intergovernmental review of multistakeholders’ plans to ensure they follow UN goals; and improving intergovernmental oversight of the entire UN system through regular meetings of the heads of all intergovernmental bodies. With the advent of many players involved in decision-making and international public-private partnerships, the secretariats are increasingly semiautonomous from their intergovernmental body, reaching out to one constituency, the international business community, thus marginalizing their overall roles with other global constituencies. These developments undermine a public view that democracy — one country-one vote with all of its exceptions — will be the guiding global governance principles today and in the future. _______________________________________________ To manage your Internet Society subscriptions or unsubscribe, log into the Member Portal at https://admin.internetsociety.org/622619/User/Login and go to the Interests tab within your profile. - View the Internet Society Code of Conduct: https://www.internetsociety.org/become-a-member/code-of-conduct/ -- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254733206359 Skype: barrack.otieno PGP ID: 0x2611D86A

1 0

Safaricom’s ultimatum before Airtel-Telkom merger
by Mwendwa Kivuva 10 Sep '19

10 Sep '19

https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/business/article/2001340740/safaricom-s-ult… Safaricom has set an ultimatum for the Telkom-Kenya and Airtel merger while downplaying claims that it is opposed to the deal, which is expected before the end of the year. On Tuesday, Telkom-Kenya Managing Director Mugo Kibati cried foul over Safaricom’s opposition to the deal, which he says, will spur innovation in the sector and put Kenya in the map as a tech giant in the region. Safaricom says it does not oppose the move but wants the two operators to settle a debt of Sh1.2 billion and the issue of frequency allocation to be rebalanced. “While we are supportive of industry changes that seek to deliver greater choice and value to consumers, we have raised valid concerns that we hope the regulator will consider and address as part of the approval process,” says Safaricom CEO Michael Joseph. “The first is the debt owed by the two operators, amounting to Sh1,297,448,468.88, incurred for the provision of various services including interconnection, co-location and fibre services. This debt is due and payable, based on the agreement to provide services entered into with the two entities as distinct operators. Our expectation is that the payment obligations should be settled in full before the transfer of business is effected.” Safaricom also wants a rebalance to the frequencies allocation. It says that the post-merger, Airtel-Telkom will jointly hold 77.5 MHz of the spectrum against a customer base of 17.3 million, compared to Safaricom’s 57.5 MHz with almost double the customer base at 31.8 million. “Given the size of Safaricom’s customer base in comparison to the current spectrum holdings, it is apparent that the transaction will create a disproportionate imbalance in the spectrum allocation, which will be inconsistent with the market share,” says Joseph. The interim CEO also wants equal treatment of operators and creation of a level playing field within the industry, specifically in relation to licensing and operations requirements. “Having articulated our concerns, we await direction from the regulator on the way forward, especially in regard to the debt payment and rebalancing of frequencies allocation.” “We also look forward to working alongside other industry players to continue delivering high quality, innovative services to Kenyans.”

4 3

Policy Hackathon on Huduma Bill 2019
by Linda Bonyo 10 Sep '19

10 Sep '19

Dear Listers, The Lawyers Hub is hosting a hackathon this Friday and Saturday on Huduma Bill as we seek to better the bill through public participation in innovative policy making. The Bill impacts Kenyas and we hope that we can use Design thinking at the policy hackathon to come up with valuable insights that will benefit the registration of communities, individuals, Asylum seekers among-st other interest groups. We will run sessions on understanding Good ID governance systems with the support of Omidyar Network. Today’s session runs from 11am to 2pm and if you prefer Saturday it will be on all day. RSVP here : ( https://www.eventbrite.com/e/policy-hackathon -on-huduma-bill-2019-digital-identity-tickets-71200052273 ) Let us know if you have any further questions on the numbers below. -- ______________________________________________ *Linda Bonyo* (Ms.) | CEO, *Lawyers Hub * Tech for Justice ACK Garden House| Block D, 6th Floor |Upper Hill, Nairobi| Kenya Email: bonyo(a)*lawyershub.ke* <bonyo(a)lawyershub.ke> | Skype*:* lawyershubke Tel: +254(0)207840228 Mobile : +254784840228 www.lawyershub.org | www.lawyershub.ke | *_**__________________________________________________________* *DISCLAIMER: The information contained in or accompanying this e-mail is intended for the use of the stated recipient only. It may contain confidential, proprietary or legally privileged information. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this message in error, please immediately delete it and all copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies of it and notify the sender. You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose, distribute, print, or copy any part of this message if you are not the intended recipient. Any views or opinions presented herein are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Lawyers Hub.*

2 1

Policy Hackathon on Huduma Bill 2019
by Linda Bonyo 06 Sep '19

06 Sep '19

Dear Listers, The Lawyers Hub is hosting a hackathon this Friday and Saturday on Huduma Bill as we seek to better the bill through public participation in innovative policy making. The Bill impacts Kenyas and we hope that we can use Design thinking at the policy hackathon to come up with valuable insights that will benefit the registration of communities, individuals, Asylum seekers among-st other interest groups. We will run sessions on understanding Good ID governance systems with the support of Omidyar Network. Today’s session runs from 11am to 2pm and if you prefer Saturday it will be on all day. RSVP here : ( https://www.eventbrite.com/e/policy-hackathon -on-huduma-bill-2019-digital-identity-tickets-71200052273 ) Let us know if you have any further questions on the numbers below. -- _______________________________________________________ *Linda Bonyo* (Ms.) | Partner, *Bonyo Mwongela & Company Advocates | Lawyers Hub* Immigration & Tech Law Practitioners. Notary Public| Commissioner of Oaths| Advocate High Court of Kenya Email: *bonyo(a)immigrationlawyer.co.ke <bonyo(a)immigrationlawyer.co.ke>* | bonyo(a)lawyershub.ke *Skype:* immigrationlawyer.ke Tel: +254(0)202211313 +254733221313 +254725372113 www.immigrationlawyer.co.ke | www.lawyershub.org | Nairobi, Kenya. *_**_____________________________________________________________________* *DISCLAIMER: The information contained in or accompanying this e-mail is intended for the use of the stated recipient only. It may contain confidential, proprietary or legally privileged information. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this message in error, please immediately delete it and all copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies of it and notify the sender. You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose, distribute, print, or copy any part of this message if you are not the intended recipient. Any views or opinions presented herein are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Bonyo Mwongela & Company Advocates.*

1 0

Caution! Data Quantity Does NOT Equal Data Quality - ICTworks
by Adam Lane 05 Sep '19

05 Sep '19

interesting and useful research from Uganda https://www.ictworks.org/data-quantity-equal-data-quality/ Caution! Data Quantity Does NOT Equal Data Quality Posted by Guest Writer Uganda tax authority Revenue administrations collect large amounts of data on individuals and firms in the course of their work. Increasingly, this data is digitised. The use of digital technologies has the potential to greatly improve the efficiency and effectiveness of tax administration. In tax collection, as in so many other areas of activity, the realisation of the potential benefits of digital technologies can be a challenging and drawn-out process. It is not simply a matter of purchasing hardware, designing software and training staff. Systems may appear to function well, at least for some purposes, but significantly underperform in terms of accuracy, efficiency or effectiveness. Tax administrations have access to large amounts of data, but they do not always manage that data effectively. The Case of Uganda Revenue Authority Data Quality The Uganda Revenue Authority (URA) uses automated digital processes to a higher degree than most tax administrations in Africa. In How Clean is our Taxpayer Register? Jova Mayega, Robert Ssuuna, Muhammad Mubajje, Milly I. Nalukwago and Lawrence Muwonge report on Data Management in the Uganda Revenue Authority. They undertook an assessment with the URA to study one important aspect of its own data management practices: the management and accuracy of one of its most important data bases, the taxpayer register. They focus on the taxpayer register for two main reasons. Registration of a taxpayer is the building block of tax administration on which hinges the effectiveness of other processes and procedures such as filing, payment, assessment, collection, auditing, reporting The integrity of the taxpayer register is fundamental to effective tax administration. It facilitates compliance monitoring Specifically, the study addresses the following questions: What are the data gaps in the taxpayer register? What are the root causes of these gaps? What challenges does the URA face in maintaining a clean tax register? What can the URA do to ensure and maintain a clean tax register? To answer the questions, they employed two main research methods: analysis of the taxpayer register, and staff interviews. They accessed the detailed taxpayer register and analysed the data that had been entered on all the variables in the TIN application form. Our interest was to check the correctness of this information and identify gaps. To identify the root causes as well as the challenges that the URA faces in maintaining a clean tax register, they held interviews and focus group discussions with staff involved in the data management process as well as the data users. uganda data quality issues 5 Data Quality Issues for Uganda Revenue Authority They discovered considerable problems of inaccurate data and, primarily as a result of the activities of tax agents, a high level of duplication of the same telephone numbers and email addresses, and possession of multiple taxpayer identification numbers. These inaccuracies reflect a number of factors, including inadequate design of registration forms and procedures, and the low priority given to verification and the accuracy of the register. 1. Taxpayers supply the URA with wrong information. The process of applying for a TIN follows self-service principles. The URA largely depends on the information that taxpayers declare. Our analysis showed that vital information, such as address, contact details and bank account details, is often wrong. For example, 147 TIN holders had bank account numbers recorded as ‘0’. For another 110 they were ‘0000000000’. The home address given for 64 TINs was a building in Kampala called Crested Towers that is in reality unoccupied. 2. Taxpayers have the same contact information. A total of 581,574 individual taxpayers – 44 per cent of the total number registered – have contact details, especially telephone numbers and email addresses, that are identical to those of at least one other registered taxpayer. The level of duplication is sometimes high. They found that 16,017 individual taxpayers had recorded the same national identification number; 6,173 had the same passport number; 3,360 shared a single email address; and 1,742 had given the same phone number 3. Possession of multiple Tax Identification Numbers They were able to identify 29,511 individual taxpayers (2.4per cent of the total) and 27 companies (0.02 per cent of the total number of non-individual taxpayers) who possessed more than one TIN. 4. Outdated Tax Identification Numbers These are TINs given to taxpayers before the implementation of e-tax in 2009. They are no longer applicable. However, they identified in the taxpayer register, as of the end of June 2018, 185,705 of these outdated TINs belonging to company directors or partners in business partnerships. 5. Inactive taxpayers A predictable result of the big increase in the numbers of registered taxpayers is an increase in the proportion who are inactive, defined as those who have not engaged in any transaction with the URA over the previous two years. This increase in inactivity is confined almost entirely to individual taxpayers. The rate of inactivity for companies and other corporate bodies has barely changed. Data Quality Root Causes There are broadly three immediate causes of the problems they list above with the accuracy of the taxpayer register. Starting with the most specific – and the most easily-remediable – they are: The design of the taxpayer registration form: The TIN application form can accept any information entered. Some fields are mandatory, but taxpayers can fill in anything to bypass system requirements. The design of the IT system used for registration: At the point of taxpayer registration, the e-tax system does not validate some of the newly declared information against information that might already be in URA databases. The behaviour of various categories of people who use the system: They found that three categories of people contribute to the errors found in the taxpayer register: taxpayers themselves, URA staff, and tax agents. Some TIN applicants are simply not honest with their information. Some URA staff are negligent. Unregistered tax agents/brokers offering tax services as a business. How to Fix Data Quality Issues The current databases have a number of data gaps, especially in regard to data quality. The URA thus needs to invest significant resources both in the short and the long term to ensure that the already available data is usable and that the new data is of sufficient quality. The URA needs to hire staff to deal solely with the registration process and tax register maintenance. Registered taxpayers should be required to confirm or amend their details regularly, possibly every two years. The government should integrate URA IT systems with those of other government and/or private agencies. The URA management needs to address the issue of negligent behaviour of staff responsible for new taxpayer registrations. Taxpayers need to be continuously sensitised on how to register for a TIN and how to amend their registration details in case of any changes. The URA collects a lot of information from taxpayers in the process of administering tax. This information is very useful in guiding decision making, enforcing compliance and also for research purposes. -------------------------------------------------- M: +254-790985886<tel:+254-790985886> Senior Director, Public Affairs Huawei Southern Africa region

1 0

EAIGF Save the Date and Call for Topics
by Liz Orembo 04 Sep '19

04 Sep '19

Dear listers We are pleased to announce that the East Africa Internet Governance Forum (EAIGF) will take place on 17th-18th October 2019 at the East Africa Community Headquarters in Arusha, Tanzania. East Africa Internet Governance Forum (EAIGF) is a platform for inclusive multilateral, multi-stakeholder and multilingual discussion on issues pertinent to enhancing Internet development in East Africa and Internet Governance issues. First convened in 2008, the EAIGF thus creates a Community of Practice allows a sustaining foundation for meaningful participation of East African stakeholders in Internet public policy debates at the national, regional and international level. The EA-IGF model allows for the informed participation, contribution and engagement of community members through the sharing of experiences and skills, solving common problems and challenges, the creation of new knowledge and increasing local capacity and talent. This year the EAIGF will be held in October 17 – 18, 2019 in Arusha, Tanzania. More on EAIGF can be found on the website: http://eaigf.africa/ . We are also reaching out to you to help us develop the theme and program for the forum. Please take a minute to fill out this form: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1zokc9nmePFMIOudXk31xCiUURjS3-QGeppG0pT0WUL… The EAIGF will be preceded by the East Africa School of Internet Governance which will take place on 14th-15th October at the same venue. Information on registration and EASIG will follow shortly. -- Best regards. Liz. Sent on behalf of the EAIGF secretariat.

2 1

Fwd: [AfrICANN-discuss] TR: Registrations open for the online course: Artificial Intelligence: Technology, Governance, and Policy Frameworks
by Barrack Otieno 03 Sep '19

03 Sep '19

Listers, This might be of interest. Best Regards ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Mamadou LO <alfamamadou(a)hotmail.com> Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2019 09:41:10 +0000 Subject: [AfrICANN-discuss] TR: Registrations open for the online course: Artificial Intelligence: Technology, Governance, and Policy Frameworks To: "africann(a)afrinic.net" <africann(a)afrinic.net> De : NCSG-Discuss <NCSG-DISCUSS(a)LISTSERV.SYR.EDU> de la part de Marilia Maciel <mariliamaciel(a)GMAIL.COM> Envoyé : lundi 2 septembre 2019 04:02 À : NCSG-DISCUSS(a)LISTSERV.SYR.EDU <NCSG-DISCUSS(a)LISTSERV.SYR.EDU> Objet : Registrations open for the online course: Artificial Intelligence: Technology, Governance, and Policy Frameworks Dear all, Applications are open for the second edition of Diplo's online course on Artificial Intelligence until the 16th of September. The course provides an interdisciplinary coverage of the topic, encompassing technical, political, legal, economic, security, and ethical issues related to AI. It will start on the 7th of October and will be conducted over a period of ten weeks. Detailed information can be found on the course webpage<https://www.diplomacy.edu/courses/ai>. You can contact me in case you have any questions. ______________________________ Marília Maciel Digital Policy Senior Researcher | DiploFoundation WMO | 7bis, Avenue de la Paix | 1202 Geneva - Switzerland MariliaM(a)diplomacy.edu<mailto:MariliaM@diplomacy.edu> | @MariliaM www.diplomacy.edu<http://www.diplomacy.edu/> -- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254733206359 Skype: barrack.otieno PGP ID: 0x2611D86A

1 0

Fwd: Netexplo Spotting session for the Netexplo 100 2020
by Bitange Ndemo 03 Sep '19

03 Sep '19

I am a member of the UNESCO's Netexplo Academic Network that spots new innovations and nominates them to an annual conference in Paris. Please circulate the attached request for next year. Ndemo. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Brigitte LASRY <blasry(a)netexplo.org> Date: Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 4:54 PM Subject: Netexplo Spotting session for the Netexplo 100 2020 To: Bitange Ndemo <bndemo(a)bitangendemo.me> Cc: Brigitte Lasry <blasry(a)netexplo.org> Dear Bitange , I hope that all is well with you, as we discussed it previously, we would like to proceed with a spotting session, starting now in September through the end of November. We hope that it is a good time for you to organize it with your students. In order to help you organize the spotting session, I am sending you the link of a PPT presentation of the whole process: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1CxAAkZoU8QfRRg79OdpngIHh4nk3uB4M/view?usp=… As we mentioned it before, we have developed a submission form on our own Netexplo platform. The problem is that, so far, the full access of the template is only accessible to you upon request. Actually, only we, see the list of projects submitted by your students, but, at any time, upon your request, we can export the full template and send it to you. Here is the link to the submission form: https://www.netexplo.org/en/proposition/43a005fc As a reminder, please note what we are looking for (not exhaustive): - innovation related to internet or digital tech - creation or emergence since 2018 - originality - likely impact I also suggest that before submitting a project, yours students first check on Netexplo website https://www.netexplo.com/n100/ that the project they want to submit has not already been submitted and is not part of previous Netexplo 100. Please don’t hesitate to contact me should you have any questions. All the best, Brigitte Brigitte LASRY I Head of International University Network +33 6 61 17 58 60 264 rue du Faubourg Saint-Honoré 75008 Paris blasry(a)netexplo.org Netexplo.com

1 0

Techweek-Nairobi-2019 - CALL FOR PAPERS DEADLINE NOW EXTENDED TO SEPTEMBER 16 - RESENDING
by Odhiambo Washington 03 Sep '19

03 Sep '19

Greetings, We are pleased to announce that the TechWeek program committee has extended the deadline for TechWeek Nairobi 2019 *CALL FOR PAPER**S UNTIL SEPTEMBER 16th 2019.* For submission of your proposals please go to https://papers.techweek.co.ke/user/login.php?event=101 <https://www.afpif.org/fr/afpif10/appel-a-communication/> For more information please visit Techweek's website here: https://www.techweek.co.ke TechWeek Secretariat -- Best regards, Odhiambo WASHINGTON, Nairobi,KE +254 7 3200 0004/+254 7 2274 3223 "Oh, the cruft.", grep ^[^#] :-)

1 0

Copyright bill 2017 and President Uhuru's directive to Senate and National Assembly
by Grace Githaiga 03 Sep '19

03 Sep '19

Listers Two weeks ago, during the burial of the Late John De Mathew, President Kenyatta urged both the Senate and National Assembly to fasten the Copyright Bill 2017 as he is ready to sign it. There were complaints from different speakers that the late musician had over 300 songs to his name but only reaped benefits from very few of them. The President directed that the music copyright office be moved from the AG’s office to the Ministry of ICT where CA can monitor which service provider has played what song. In addition, CA was directed that renewal of licenses for various broadcasters and providers be pegged to those who had paid the artistes royalties. The copyright bill 2017 http://www.parliament.go.ke/sites/default/files/2018-09/COPYRIGHT%20%28AMEN… Section 24 proposes to include 35 (A) on Protection of Internet Service Provider and 35(B) on Take down notice. On the takedown request, section 35 (B) (g) requires a complainant to attach an affidavit or any other declaration attesting to claim of ownership, validity of the rights, good faith and setting out any efforts to have entities responsible for making the content available to remove the content; (h) be copied to the Board, Communication Authority and the recognised umbrella association of service providers. In 35 (B) (4), an Internet Service Provider shall, upon receipt of a valid takedown notice, notify the person responsible for making available the alleged infringing content and provide them with a copy of the notice as soon as is practicable. However, in (5) the Internet Service provider shall disable access to the material within forty-eight business hours unless it receives a counter notice fulfilling the requirements set out for a takedown notice and contesting the contents of the takedown notice. See, an artiste can complain, but a service provider can receive a counter notice. How does this help to protect copyright? This issue of exploitation of creatives has gone on for long. Should we not be thinking through of better ways that do not claw back on formal complaints? Will the moving of the music copyright office from AG to ICT Ministry cure the exploitation problem? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Grace Githaiga Twitter: @ggithaiga Skype: gracegithaiga Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/gracegithaiga ...the most important office in a democracy is the citizen. So, you see, that’s what our democracy demands. It needs you!----Barrack Obama.

1 0