[fosscomm] Legal options WAS AICTE Expert Empanelment
vvcrishna at gmail.com
Wed May 25 20:26:16 PDT 2011
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 8:21 AM, H.S.Rai <hardeep.rai at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 8:04 AM, A. Mani <a.mani.cms at gmail.com> wrote:
> > The link is on www.aicte-india.org
> > (scripts need to be enabled)
> > There is a pdf help file too
> Where? and what will be use of that.
> > . .... activex, iframes, jre, ...
> > Did you try all of the IE stuff in FF4?
> No. Mine FireFox is 3.6.17, I tired Konqueror, Chromium.
This thread seems to be conjuncted with the other concurrent thread on
income tax. The solution provided by DeepRoot seems to me (I am not a user
myself at this time, but am interested, obviously, in it being possible for
me in years to come) to be a workaround, fitting something in with a spanner
and a hammer when a different method, easier to use, is available for those
who use proprietary software.
It is possible that this AICTE thing may also have a workaround that someone
can build, given enough time and assuming the result is worth it.
The question is, why? Why should the public be forced to use workarounds as
an alternative to using proprietary solutions, that by their very opacity,
are possible (I am not making an accusation here, just pointing out the
obvious, just as I don't have to put my hand on a kettle on the stove in
order to find out whether it is full of boiling water) to seriously
compromise one's personal assets?
Is it possible to file a suit against the government, citing cases like
this? imho, the prayer ought to be that the government take steps to ensure
its citizen-facing actions, such as tax filings, or applications for public
positions, be open to all without fear or favour. To put teeth into that
'ought', the court needs to levy a penalty on the offending departments, the
implication being that departments that wilfully do so in the future will be
liable to greater penalties. The penalties can be paid into a fund, from
which petitioners who have suffered identifiable cash losses (including
penalties for non-compliance with tax directives etc) can be compensated,
plus payments can be made to third party vendors who can work with the
designated government departments (NIC, for instance) to bring all
government departments up to speed.
The court also needs to examine (and I suggest this because I think the
matter is linked) whether the government, through such actions (ie forcing
end-users to use certain proprietary solutions) is endangering national
security, and if so, whether inaction on the part of the designated
authority (CERT-IN) can be penalised.
What will it take to press such a suit?
> network mailing list
> network at lists.fosscom.in
Fool On The Hill <http://communicall.wordpress.com>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the network