Hi Friends,

Even as I launch this today ( my 80th Birthday ), I realize that there is yet so much to say and do. There is just no time to look back, no time to wonder,"Will anyone read these pages?"

With regards,
Hemen Parekh
27 June 2013

Now as I approach my 90th birthday ( 27 June 2023 ) , I invite you to visit my Digital Avatar ( www.hemenparekh.ai ) – and continue chatting with me , even when I am no more here physically

Thursday, 28 August 2025

LESSONS FROM NAPSTER

 Kartavya  

Abhi / Nagwekar  
Inder / Pooja  

All the Rave  
— The Rise & Fall of (by Joseph Menn)  

This book was reviewed in Financial Times (FT).  
Based on this review,  
In enclosed pages, I have tried to compare:  
• What Napster did / did not  
• What we should learn from Napster story  

Obviously, there is a lot to learn.  

And we must learn it well & translate into action.  
And, if in the process of implementation,  
we make mistakes (which we will), let us  
learn from these mistakes and correct them fast.  

Being able to make a quick “course-correction”  
is possible only on the internet.  
On the ground, if we put up a factory to manufacture tractors  
at an investment of Rs. 100 crores — and if tractors don’t sell,  
I cannot overnight convert that factory  
to manufacture microwave ovens!  
“Clicks” can be changed quickly — “bricks” cannot.

cc: Mr. Nagle.




What NAPSTER did                         | What we should do to create a VIRTUAL EMPLOYMENT EXCHANGE  
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Created a "File Sharing" technology      | We will create GPRS (Global People Resourcing System)  
on internet                              | as a web service.

File-sharing technology gave each        | We would try our best to ensure that our website  
surfer access to the music that was      | subscribers CANNOT exchange their “resume databases”  
stored on other computers that happened  | amongst themselves directly — bypassing us. How?  
to be online (not necessarily logged  
onto Napster).                           | We will encourage them to deposit/credit their own  
                                         | private resume databases into 3P’s central database.  
At one time, NAPSTER had 70 million      | These resumes being deposited will have to be UNIQUE.  
users and trillions of bilateral  
exchanges (of music data files),         | Incentive:  
completely bypassing NAPSTER.            | i) If Company A deposits 500 unique resumes into  
                                         | 3P’s database, they get to search & download an  
Millions of "songs" did NOT reside       | equal amount (no.) of resumes from 3P’s database,  
in a single/central database.            | FREE! (No transaction charge).  
Users were free to contact each other    | Works like a DEBIT card — Deposit money into your  
directly & strike “deals” on their own. | account before withdrawing. Withdrawals limited to  
NAPSTER had no role to play,             | balance in your account.  
except permitting use of its technology. |  

Notes in green ink:  
“In fact, under feature ‘START YOUR OWN BUSINESS’, we are trying to upload some 150,000 text resumes on FileFactory.com (a file-sharing website), from where anyone can download these for free.”  
— Idea is to get them to start using Resume Rater.  
— Even if that one guy said, “no need to build Exchange — resumes are a commodity.”  
— In hindsight, this does not appear workable.  
— 30/09/2008


What NAPSTER did:
Napster became an
"Unlimited library of free music"

What we should do to create a Virtual Employment Exchange:
#1
We are not going to give away resumes "free"! It will be Rs. 10/- for each resume downloaded from 3P's central database.

Exceptions:
▶ Free download up to your CREDIT-BALANCE
▶ Unlimited no. of downloads for unlimited period of time — completely FREE — for your own resumes.

Of course, this will require each “deposited” resume (which are all UNIQUE to begin with) to be “linked” to the particular subscriber who has deposited.

These provisions will encourage subscribers to deposit their own/unwanted resumes into 3P’s database — in order to increase their CREDIT-BALANCE.
(I have everything to gain & nothing to lose!)


What NAPSTER did:
"Unlimited Number" of Songs became available to users (but who would want to download/store 5 million songs on his hard-disk just because these are FREELY available?)

No one/single person would find time to listen to 500 songs DAILY, simply because unlimited numbers are available on his hard-disk!

Then there is neither any “Monetary Gain/Benefit” of downloading/creating your own private database of 5 million songs!
Why should anyone buy from you if he can get these free from any number of places — and whenever he feels like!

What we should do to create a Virtual Employment Exchange:
We are unlikely to have “unlimited” no. of resumes in 3P’s central database because we are NOT going to pay anything to anyone for helping create central database.

No doubt, we are going to pay in KIND (not in cash).
(i.e., free download up to each subscriber’s CREDIT-BALANCE).
Do not mix this up with MONEY CREDIT BALANCE!
I mean “Resume Credit Balance.”

And each subscriber “draws” from this central resume database of 3P
→ what he wants
→ when he wants
(some “free”, some at Rs. 10/-),
without having to worry about “management” of a resume database of 10/20 million jobseekers.

This is BPO at its best!
And at 10 million level, why should any company
→ bother to create/maintain private database?
→ even advertise on job sites/newspapers?
Much easier/cheaper to search 3P’s database!!


What NAPSTER did:
Violated “copyrights” of music companies who created song albums.
Entire business was built upon the illegal pirating of copyright material — without paying anything.

What we should do to create a Virtual Employment Exchange:
▶ Resumes residing on job sites are “Public Domain Knowledge.”
Jobseekers put up/upload their resumes on many/many job sites, hoping/praying that

  • somebody will notice it & read it & download it.

▶ Jobseekers who send us their resumes (against Project Manhattan / Ego / Cyber / Jaws etc), are giving these to us, of their own free volition & permit us/pray to us to make these available to corporates.

▶ Subscribers of our web service, who decide to “deposit” certain no. of resumes into 3P’s central database, also do it willingly!

So, at no time we are violating copyrights.
Our website clearly states that we may “sell” these resumes!
(See “TERMS” – Let us make these explicit if required).

What NAPSTER did

Shaun Fanning
(teenager who created Napster)

"...he did not know, how he could make money out of it."

"...purposely avoided developing a serious business-plan — partly to avoid reaping profits that could have damaged its defense against legal actions by the record labels whose copyright it was violating."
Its basic intention was to extort money from leading record-labels and then cut a deal from a position of illegally obtained strength!


What we should do to create a VIRTUAL EMPLOYMENT EXCHANGE

  • Our Business-plan & Revenue-Model are very clear.
    We want to make plenty of money, make it absolutely legally, without stealing/pirating anyone’s content, without violating any copyright, and by providing unparalleled service to our subscribers.

  • We are an intermediary / broker / link (between jobseekers & employers/webservice subscribers).
    We add value to a subscriber’s recruitment process by:

    • improving quality of recruitment-related decisions

    • increasing process-productivity

    • speeding up selection/appointments of executives


  • We provide a platform on which buyers (i.e. employers) & sellers (jobseekers) can meet, but we only charge the buyers for use of our platform.

  • Someday we may also charge jobseekers for "job alerts" & "resume-blasting" services.

  • Someday, if we manage to build up a resume database of 20 million, newspapers may lose their job-advert-related revenues (because no corporate may advertise) — but we will help them increase their circulation/subscription by offering free job-advert summary (JAWS).


  • We will create additional revenue-models for:

    • Cybercafes (JAWS Lock-in)

    • PCOs (We will offer free e-talent)

    • Cellphone operators (JobAlerts)

    • TV Channels (JAWS)

  • We will get jobseekers & HR managers to create CONTENT / KNOWLEDGE-BASE.

We will never get into content creation on our own.


What we should do to create a VIRTUAL EMPLOYMENT EXCHANGE?

When our web service gets launched — and grows over next few months, it is quite probable that some jobsite or some executive search firm or some newspaper or some software company, may “copy” our model & try to overtake us by leveraging its strengths (e.g. existing corporate subscribers / advertisers / customer base / technology / reach of distribution network / existing resume database etc.).

This should be expected — and we cannot stop this from happening.
We may get some “Early Mover” advantage —
but how can we retain/increase this advantage?

▶ By adding new features/modules every week.
▶ By getting jobseekers & HR Managers to contribute to our Knowledge-Base
(keywords / functions / rules / job-descriptions / org. charts etc.)
on a continuous/ongoing basis.
▶ By turning (perceived) COMPETITORS into our NETWORK-COLLABORATORS or LICENSEES.
Example:

  • Jobsites (as Licensees) – Hub & Spoke

  • Placement Agencies (as Subscribers)

  • Newspapers / Mags (as publishers of JAWS)

  • Cybercafes / TV Channels (” ”)

  • ISPs / Cellphone Operators (” ” of Job Alerts)


What we should do to create a VIRTUAL EMPLOYMENT EXCHANGE?

When launched, NAPSTER itself had no competitors — but Napster was “destroying” the record industry — who perceived Napster as a “threat”, and it was in Napster’s interest to remove this (threat) “perception”.

When we launch our web service,
→ to whom would we pose a threat?
→ who, if at all, is likely to get “destroyed”?

As far as I can make out, in the first place, these would be jobsites (monsterIndia / naukri / jobsahead / jobstreet etc.)

So, we must get them to join us (co-operate with us) instead of trying to compete with us.
How can we do this?
→ Showing them that they can make much more money, by becoming our “Licensees” — so why fight?

→ By showing them that those of them, who try to “opt out”, will get isolated & lose out!
We must give them a “Good” deal (terms), but it should become crystal clear to them, that they stand no chance — that they are fighting a losing battle!


This can only happen when we accumulate:

  • 2/3 million resumes

  • 200/300 large corporate-subscribers

We must start by signing-up smaller job-sites or even portals like Rediff (which earned Rs.30 cr & lost Rs.60 cr in last quarter Q2 2002/03!!)

Wednesday, 27 August 2025

At the Edge of the Caribbean: How Diplomacy Can Pull Us Back from the Brink

At the Edge of the Caribbean: How Diplomacy Can Pull Us Back from the Brink

At the Edge of the Caribbean: How Diplomacy Can Pull Us Back from the Brink

I have been following the recent developments between the United States and Venezuela with a mixture of alarm and weary familiarity. The images and reports are stark: US destroyers, an amphibious ready group carrying thousands of Marines, and additional warships and a nuclear-powered submarine assembling in the southern Caribbean; Venezuela responding with warships, drone patrols, militia mobilisations and a call for UN intervention Al Jazeera AP News Miami Herald France24 Le Monde New York Times.

This is not just an episode of tough rhetoric. The doubling of the bounty on President Nicolás Maduro and the designation of Venezuelan groups as terrorist or “narco-terrorist” organisations have hardened positions on both sides, raising the stakes beyond a simple anti-narcotics operation Al Jazeera Miami Herald. As I have thought before, military buildups so often become self-fulfilling prophecies: proximity breeds friction, friction breeds accidents, and accidents can cascade into crises.

I want to set out, as plainly as I can, how this situation could be defused through diplomacy rather than force. My approach is practical and incremental — a set of measures that can reduce immediate risk while creating space for longer-term political solutions.

1) Immediate crisis-management measures — stop the clock

When vessels from two adversarial states operate near each other, the first objective must be to reduce the risk of unintended incidents. Practical steps include:

  • Establish a bilateral naval hotline and clear communication channels between operational commanders to manage encounters at sea (distance, identification, maneuvers). This is a classic confidence-building measure in tense maritime theatres and reduces the chance that a routine interception becomes a headline-grabbing clash.
  • Agree short-term safety protocols: minimum separation zones, no-live-fire zones, and pre-notified patrol lanes. These need not imply recognition of political legitimacy; they are technical, safety-focused measures.
  • Invite an impartial observer mechanism — for example, UN or neutral third-party naval observers — to monitor compliance with maritime safety arrangements. Venezuela has already petitioned the UN and framed the US deployment as a threat to regional peace Le Monde France24.

These measures are meant to buy time — to stop a spiral caused by miscalculation.

2) Short-term diplomatic channels — create credible, deniable avenues

Public posturing will continue, but parallel discreet diplomacy can reduce incentives for escalation:

  • Open back-channel talks using neutral mediators — states with credibility in both capitals (Mexico, CARICOM members, Brazil depending on its posture) or regional organisations (OAS in some formats, or the UN Secretary-General’s good offices). These channels allow each side to make small, tangible concessions without losing face.
  • Use multilateral platforms to reframe the operation’s narrative. If the US insists this is about drugs, creating a joint, transparent anti-narcotics framework with regional partners would be more credible than a predominantly military posture Al Jazeera.
  • Negotiate a short, narrowly scoped verification mechanism: joint intelligence-sharing limited to drug-trafficking interdiction rather than political targeting. The technical focus can depoliticise cooperation.

These are politically delicate moves — they require both sides to accept partial de-escalatory steps without treating them as capitulation.

3) Addressing the substance: legitimacy, evidence and legal processes

One central obstacle is the US’s public criminal allegations and bounties against Venezuela’s leadership. These complicate diplomacy because they convert a security operation into a law-enforcement and political crusade.

  • I believe an independent, internationally led investigation into the narco-trafficking allegations — with agreed terms and safeguards — would be useful. If credible evidence exists, it should be processed through transparent legal mechanisms. If it does not, emphasising verification helps de-escalate the moral justification for military presence.
  • Provide a legal channel respecting international law for extradition and prosecution where warranted, rather than relying on public bounties that inflame domestic politics and close off diplomacy.

The goal is not to grant impunity but to move allegations into institutions rather than into the theatre of naval power.

4) Regionalising the solution — build a coalition around non-military instruments

The Caribbean and Latin America have a strong stake in preventing a showdown. A regional approach could include:

  • A multilateral anti-narcotics task force led by regional states with UN oversight, clear rules of engagement, and capacity-building rather than large-scale foreign military presence.
  • Economic and humanitarian confidence-building measures: targeted sanctions relief tied to verifiable steps on counter-narcotics cooperation, humanitarian programs to reduce incentives for criminal economies, and support for border policing reforms.
  • Trusted regional interlocutors (e.g., Mexico, Guyana, Brazil, CARICOM) can broker arrangements that feel less like great-power imposition and more like collective security.

These options can shift the debate from confrontation to cooperation.

5) Manage domestic politics — reduce performative escalation

Both governments face domestic pressures. The US administration is using a tough anti-drug posture domestically; Venezuela’s leadership is mobilising militias and nationalist rhetoric to shore up legitimacy Miami Herald France24.

  • Diplomatic efforts must provide political cover: quiet agreements that can be presented domestically as victories (e.g., a regional anti-drug initiative, joint interdiction successes, humanitarian milestones). Small, tangible wins are the currency of politics.

6) Long-term: depoliticise enforcement and strengthen institutions

If the region is to avoid repeated cycles, the long arc must focus on institutions:

  • Strengthen regional law enforcement, prosecutorial capacities, and asset-tracing mechanisms so that drug networks can be pursued legally and transparently.
  • Invest in development and rule-of-law programs in border regions that are the breeding grounds for illicit economies.
  • Reassess the use of sanctions and bounties as primary levers of policy; they can close doors to negotiation and empower hardliners.

Taken together, these steps aim to transform a military standoff into a policy problem solvable by institutions.

Why I think this path is realistic

I do not underestimate the political difficulties. But history has taught me that military posturing is brittle; it can protect or it can provoke. Where leaders have chosen to step back, they did so through a blend of technical confidence-building, third-party mediation, and politically palatable trade-offs. Analysts in the reporting have downplayed the chance of an invasion but warned of accidents and miscalculations — precisely the scenarios my proposals try to prevent Al Jazeera France24 AP News.

If I am honest, what worries me most is the narrowing of options when politics becomes performative: once a bounty is public or a naval task force is at sea, reversing course is politically costly. Diplomacy becomes harder the longer military postures persist. That is why the immediate priority must be to lower temperatures with technical, verifiable steps and create breathing space for the harder political conversations.

I believe there is room for such a course. The alternatives — an avoidable accident, an escalation born of misreading an opponent’s intent — are too costly to gamble on.


Regards,
Hemen Parekh