Bar&Bench News Network
The Supreme Court has just closed a tender for the purchase of 50 top-of-the-line Apple Macbook Pro laptops as part of their drive to upgrade technology. Each of these laptops cost in excess of Rs. 1,20,000 ($2500), and the tender has been issued by the National Informatics Center, which also runs the Judgment Information System for the Supreme Court, the High Courts and some District courts.
It is being speculated that the system specification for a Windows Operating System (OS) is due to the fact that certain law-related software such as SCC Online are only Windows-compatible.
The tender also mentions Livescribe smartpen and dot paper, an audio application that is intended to keep track of arguments in long-pending cases, and arguments by various counsels that span a number of days.
Ajay Kumar, a tech-savvy law student of Christ University, suggests that the Supreme Court use Open Source software instead of Windows. He points out that government agencies across the world, from Brazil to Iran to France are on a drive to introduce open source software in order to ease the Microsoft/US stranglehold on the software markets. "OpenSource means free updates and no one-time cost of buying the software. This buying of Macbooks and Windows OS is unnecessary expenditure" he states.
Ajay also has issues with the Supreme Court's decision to buy Apple. "Why MacBooks?" he asks. "Have we run out of Indian-made hardware? What is wrong with HCL?" An interesting point, and one that a government currently on an austerity drive would do well to take note of.
|
- 1. "What is wrong in government investing in technology? If macbooks can make judges deliver judgments faster- I have no issues. Also, gone are the days when we should say Indian government should buy Indian products. Government should be open to foreign products. This is no longer 1990s. If India wants to be a global leader tomorrow, government needs to think like a global leader. A west bengal mindset will not help India in the long run. ". Vikash, Mumbai
- 2. "The Supreme Court, either does not understand technology or is being misguided by its advisors at NIC. An apple computer is only good looking hardware and installing Proprietary System on it where the Licensing fee is high and the user has no freedom to copy, modify or share sounds like a stupid step. The judges are mostly not as tech savvy as we would like them to be and installing Microsoft windows on fancy laptops is in no way going to help deliver better or faster judgments.". Anonymous, Delhi
- 3. "The real question is whether the expensive machines are right use of funds by the court. I don't think so. ". Abu, Dubai
Related Stories
- 'Office of profit' amendment is constitutional, says Supreme Court
- Supreme Court adds 5 to strength
- Cipla scores victory in the Supreme Court
- Karanjawala represents Jaswant Singh in the Supreme Court
- Supreme Court curbs Mayawati's statue spree
- Delhi MMS Clip: Luthra & Luthra, Harish Salve, Sidharth Luthra represent Avnish Bajaj; obtain stay in Supreme Court
- Supreme Court says no beard rule is absurd
Other News
- Linklaters Managing Associate Pranav Sharma to rejoin Amarchand Mangaldas as Partner
- Re-Upped Round up May 17
- Recruitment Tracker: Luthra top recruiter followed by Amarchand and AZB for NALSAR Class of 2012
- Siddharth Wahi joins JSA as Of Counsel; Former Baker Mckenzie SA to focus on Energy Sector
- Re-Upped Round up May 16
- Bombay HC taking proactive steps to fight pendency; Special committee to examine pending civil suits for speedy disposal
- CLAT Booze Bills: NUJS defies providing information under RTI Act
The Viewpoint: Indemnification Provisions - Is the fight on the indemnity clause worth the effort?
May 17, 2012 | Bar & Bench brings to you the twentieth article on 'The Viewpoint' series with its Knowledge Partner AZB & Partners. AZB Senior Associate Nandish Vyas and Associate Pranati Ishwar in this article seek to examine the context in which indemnification rights are relevant for acquisition transactions, and also seek to explore if there are areas where they are potentially not worth the comments (2)










