Yogender Kumar likes to “listen” to books. For the visually challenged postgraduate student of Delhi University, this is a daily habit. “There were very few books in Braille — at least not the ones I wanted to read,” he says, talking about his school and college days. Then he got to know about audio books — books that could be heard on a tape, a CD or on the Internet. That’s how he explored the works of his favourite author, Munshi Premchand.

Kumar and his friends have found another way to listen to their favourite books as well as college notes. “We simply ask our non-blind friends to record them for us. In some cases electronically available books are converted into audio formats,” he says.

But an amendment (Copyright Amendment Bill, 2010) to the Copyright Act, 1957, may put an end to Kumar and his friends’ innovative ways of seeking knowledge.

The bill, tabled in the Rajya Sabha recently, aims at tightening copyright loopholes. But “an exception” in the bill makes certain provisions for people with vision and other problems so that they can access books in Braille and other such formats without facing copyright issues. Section 52(1) (za) of the bill says printed material can be converted to “specially designed” formats such as Braille and sign language for people with disabilities.

The intentions are noble — in fact, it was the lobbying by disabled groups that led to the “exception” being framed. But the “exception” is simply not enough, advocates of the rights of the disabled argue.

People with disabilities need different kinds of books such as audio books, reading material with large font sizes, or electronic text. Even among the blind, not everyone can read Braille. In any case, only around 0.5 per cent of all published books in India get converted into Braille. The amendment’s exception refers to Braille, but makes no mention of the other formats, which most people with disabilities now turn to for knowledge and pleasure.

“Even the visually challenged have moved on to learning from other formats, but our government strangely enough is still stuck in the past,” says Javed Abidi, executive director of the National Centre for Promotion of Employment for Disabled People, Delhi.

Further, it doesn’t take different kinds of disabilities into account, for it’s not just the visually challenged who will be affected by the bill. Shamnad Basheer, ministry of human resource development (HRD) professor in intellectual property law, National University of Juridical Sciences, Calcutta, points out that many people with strong physical disabilities cannot hold books — and therefore books in Braille will be of no use to them. “Isn’t this discrimination of the highest order,” he asks.

Rahul Cherian, one of the founders of Inclusive Planet, a Chennai-based organisation working for the disabled, agrees. “This amendment does not benefit the millions affected by cerebral palsy, dyslexia and low vision and the millions of blind and visually impaired people who do not know Braille. This is entirely limiting and counterproductive,” he says.

For organisations for the disabled, which have been campaigning for an amendment to the Copyright Act to facilitate the conversion of books and periodicals into formats, such as audio recordings and digital copies compatible with screen reading software, the amendments proposed by the government have come as a rude shock.

“Let the government make a provision in the law making it mandatory for the publishers of books to come up with limited copies in formats that can be accessed by the disabled. We are not asking for a favour — this is the right of the disabled,” says Abidi.

Bihu Sharma, a Delhi-based intellectual property lawyer, stresses that the aim of an accessibility exception to copyright would be to ensure that disabled persons are able to enjoy copyrighted works to the same extent as abled persons. “It is, however, debatable whether the proposed amendment is successful in doing so,” says Sharma.

Activists for the disabled also have a problem with the bill’s proposed system of licensing. A licence is needed by anybody who wants to convert a book into a format that can be used by the disabled. But not everybody can seek a licence. Section 31B (1) states that only those working “primarily for the benefit of persons with disability” can apply for a licence before a copyright board. This, the activists say, would bar individuals, schools and non governmental organisations (NGOs) from undertaking conversion and distribution.

There are many major and minor issues that the amendment doesn’t take into consideration. In India, most textual conversions are conducted by persons with disabilities, or their parents, volunteers, educational institutions and NGOs, who also pay for the conversion. “Any amendment has to take into account these ground realities,” says Cherian.

The activists also feel that the licensing format, even for those being permitted to publish in special formats, could be cumbersome and time-consuming. “The eligibility requirements for a licence is mind boggling. It shuts out some of the most reputed and well-meaning organisations working for the disabled. Even for those who are eligible, the waiting period could result in students losing academic years,” says Sam Taraporevala, director, Xavier’s Resource Centre for the Visually Challenged, Mumbai.

At another level, the amendment may stop a person from exercising his or her right to education, an act that was recently passed by Parliament. “How will persons with disability exercise their right to education if they are not free to convert material into formats they are comfortable with,” asks Cherian.

Basheer points out that with the act, the government seeks to enable India to “leverage the wonders” of the Internet and the digital era. “However, as far as the disabled go, the same logic does not appear to apply.”

Some observers are outraged at what they see as the “step-motherly” treatment of people with disabilities. “We had requested HRD minister Kapil Sibal to form a sub-committee similar to the one that was established to look into the problems of Bollywood lyricists and producers, but nothing happened on that front,” says Taraporevala.

But there is still hope. The activists point out that Opposition parties such as the Bharatiya Janata Party and the Communist Party of India have come out in support of the disabled, and have threatened to block the bill unless their concerns are addressed.

“We didn’t want to fight this issue politically, but the HRD ministry pushed us to the wall. We shall not rest until we achieve our rights,” says Abidi.