SUMMARY / RELATED TOPICS

Kshatriya

Kshatriya is one of the four varna of Hindu society, associated with warriorhood. The Sanskrit term kṣatriyaḥ is used in the context of Vedic society wherein members were organised into four classes: brahmin, kshatriya and shudra; the administrative machinery in the Vedic India was headed by a tribal king called Rajan whose position was not hereditary. The king was elected in a tribal assembly; the Rajan protected cattle. The concept of fourfold varna system was non-existent; the hymn Purusha Sukta to the Rigveda describes the symbolic creation of the four varna-s through cosmic sacrifice. Some scholars consider the Purusha Sukta to be a late interpolation into the Rigveda based on the neological character of the composition, as compared to the more archaic style of the vedic literature. Since not all Indians were regulated under the varna in the vedic society, the Purusha Sukta was composed in order to secure vedic sanction for the heredity caste scheme. An alternate explanation is that the word'Shudra' does not occur anywhere else in the Rig-veda except the Purusha Sukta, leading some scholars to believe the Purusha Sukta was a composition of the Rig-vedic period itself to denote and sanctify an oppressive and exploitative class structure that had come into existence then.

Although the Purusha Sukta uses the term rajanya, not kshatriya, it is considered the first instance in the extant Vedic texts where four social classes are mentioned for the first time together. Usage of the term Rajanya indicates the'kinsmen of the rajan' had emerged as a distinct social group such that by the end of the vedic period, the term rajanya was replaced by kshatriya; the term rajanya unlike the word kshatriya denoted the status within a lineage. Whereas kshatra, means "ruling. Jaiswal points out the term Brahman occurs in the Rig-veda with the exception of the Purusha Sukta and may not have been used for the priestly class. Based on the authority of Panini, Patanjali and the Mahabharata, Jayaswal believes that Rajanya was the name of political people and that the Rajanyas were, therefore, a democracy; some examples were the Vrsni Rajanyas who followed the system of elected rulers. Ram Sharan Sharma details how the central chief was elected by various clan chiefs or lineage chiefs with increasing polarisation between the rajanya and the vis leading to a distinction between the chiefs as a separate class on one hand and vis on the other hand.

The term kshatriya comes from kshatra and implies temporal authority and power, based less on being a successful leader in battle and more on the tangible power of laying claim to sovereignty over a territory, symbolising ownership over clan lands. This gave rise to the idea of kingship; the Srimad Bhagavata Gita has the following quoted lines by Sri Krishna: शौर्यं तेजो धृतिर्दाक्ष्यं युध्दे चाप्यपलायनम् ।दानमीश्वरभावश्च क्षात्रं कर्म स्वभावजम् ॥१८-४३ ॥ Kshatriya never flees from the war, he shows bravery, skill and patience in the face of war. Donation to the society and protecting citizens are the norms of a Kshatriya. In the period of the Brahmanas there was ambiguity in the position of the varna. In the Panchavimsha Brahmana, the Rajanya are placed first, followed by Brahmana Vaishya. In Shatapatha Brahmana 13.8.3.11, the Kshatriya are placed second. In Shatapatha Brahmana 1.1.4.12 the order is—Brahmana, Rajanya, Shudra. The order of the brahmanical tradition—Brahmana, Vaishya, Shudra—became fixed from the time of dharmasutras.

The kshatriya were considered pre-eminent in Buddhist circles. Among Hindu societies they were sometimes at rivalry with the Brahmins, but they acknowledged the superiority of the priestly class. Writing in the context of how the jajmani system operated in the 1960s, Pauline Kolenda noted that the "caste function of the Kshatriya is to lead and protect the village, with conquest to manage their conquered lands; the Kshatriyas do perform these functions today to the extent possible, by distributing food as payments to kamins and providing leadership." In rituals, the nyagrodha danda, or staff, is assigned to the kshatriya class, along with a mantra, intended to impart physical vitality or'ojas'. The Vedas do not mention kshatriya of any vansha; the lineages of the Itihasa-Purana tradition are: the Solar dynasty. There are other lineages, such as Agnivanshi, in which an eponymous ancestor rises out of Agni, Nagavanshi, claiming descent from the Nāgas; the Nagavanshi, not attested in the Itihasa-Purana tradition, were Naga tribes whose origin can be found in scriptures.

Indian caste system Forward castes Sanskritisation AJGAR Ramesh Chandra Majumdar, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan. History and Culture of Indian People, The Vedic Age. Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1996. Pp. 313–314

Itar-Tass Russian News Agency v. Russian Kurier, Inc.

Itar-Tass Russian News Agency v. Russian Kurier, Inc. 153 F.3d 82, was a copyright case about the Russian language weekly Russian Kurier in New York City that had copied and published various materials from Russian newspapers and news agency reports of Itar-TASS. The case was decided by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; the decision was commented upon and the case is considered a landmark case because the court defined rules applicable in the U. S. on the extent to which the copyright laws of the country of origin or those of the U. S. apply in international disputes over copyright. The court held that to determine whether a claimant held the copyright on a work, the laws of the country of origin applied, but that to decide whether a copyright infringement had occurred and for possible remedies, the laws of the country where the infringement was claimed applied. Itar-TASS, several Russian newspapers, a Russian association of professional journalists sued Russian Kurier, its owner, its printing company for copyright infringement in 1995 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.

The court issued a preliminary injunction against the defendant. This preliminary injunction applied to all copied articles for which the plaintiffs had registered copyright with the U. S. Copyright Office or that were published after March 13, 1995, the date Russia signed the Berne Convention; the U. S. at that time still required explicit copyright registrations for copyrights to be recognized as valid. Of the more than 500 articles Russian Kurier had copied from 1992 to 1995, the court considered 317 copyrighted in the U. S. as "Berne Works", a further 28 first published in Russia before March 13, 1995 were copyrighted in the U. S. because they were indeed registered at the U. S. Copyright Office, accounting for a total of 345 copyright violations. In its ruling two years the court found Russian Kurier and its owner guilty of multiple copyright violations, committed willfully; the court fined the defendants US$500,000 in favor of the plaintiffs. The printing company was fined US$3,934 as by printing the newspaper, the court considered it had contributed to the commitment of these copyright violations, although without intent.

The court defined that the plaintiffs' rights were to be determined by Russian law, but the infringement had to be judged by U. S. law. However, the district court denied the journalist's association any right to relief as it was unclear which of its members were authors of the copied articles, or whether all such authors were indeed members. There was some dispute over the copyright claims by the newspapers, as the defendants experts argued that these only held a copyright on their publication "as a whole" but not on individual articles, but the district judge agreed with the plaintiffs' expert who interpreted the relevant paragraphs of the Russian law as giving rise to "parallel exclusive rights in both the newspaper publisher and the reporter", similar to co-authorship; the defendants appealed against that court's ruling. The case came before the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which confirmed and reversed the district court's ruling and remanded the case for further proceedings.

The court of appeals affirmed the choice of applicable law made by the lower court. It agreed that Russian law was to be used to determine, the copyright holder of a work and that U. S. law was to be applied to judge it. However, it overturned the decision of the district court regarding the newspapers; the court of appeals, after extensive analysis, found the view of the defendants' experts on the matter "more compelling". It stated that newspapers had no copyright on individual articles in their publications but only a compilation copyright on the publication as a whole; the copyright on the text of the individual articles was found to vest in the individual authors of these articles unless there had been a contractual assignment of copyrights from the reporters to their employers. Since the newspapers did not provide any evidence of such copyright assignments, the appellate court ruled in this case that they did not hold the copyright on the text of the individual copied articles; the court explicitly decided that Itar-TASS, as a news agency, was a copyright holder and was entitled to injunctive relief and damages, that the Union of Journalists of Russia might be entitled to relief as it was considered acting on behalf of its members, amongst them the individual authors of the copied articles, that the newspapers, albeit not entitled to relief due to copying of the article text as they didn't hold the copyright, might still be entitled to relief due to the wholesale cut-and-paste copying done by Russian Kurier, which might have infringed the newspapers' rights arising from the creative efforts in the selection, arrangement, or display of the articles.

Because o

Hannah Beech

Hannah Beech is an American journalist. Since August 2017, she has been the Southeast Asia Bureau Chief for The New York Times based in Bangkok, she worked for TIME Magazine. In September 2017 she reported on the desperate situation of Rohingya refugees fleeing violence in Myanmar. In 2009, Beech was awarded for Excellence in Reporting Breaking News, Honourable Mention, in the Society of Publishers in Asia Awards for Editorial Excellence, for her reporting on Cyclone Nargis in Burma, she received a 2007 Honourable Mention for Best Opinion Writing. Beech graduated in 1995 from Colby College, she did undergraduate internships at U. S. News & World Report and Asian media outlets, she was the 1994 recipient of the Harry S. Truman Scholarship for Maryland. Beech is married to journalist and author and freelance reporter Brook Larmer, they have two sons. Beech, Hannah. With reporting by Truong Uyen Ly. "Vietnam looks forward". World. Time. 185: 28–35