Question 1: Is it too early to establish a regulatory framework for OTT services, since internet penetration is still evolving, access speeds are generally low and there is limited coverage of high-speed broadband in the country? Or, should some beginning be made now with a regulatory framework that could be adapted to changes in the future? Please comment with justifications.
No regulatory framework is needed. We need an open Internet. No data services on the internet should be subject to regulation.


Question 2: Should the OTT players offering communication services (voice, messaging and video call services) through applications (resident either in the country or outside) be brought under the licensing regime? Please comment with justifications.
No. We need an open Internet. Please understand that startups and innovation will be severely hurt if there is no net neutrality moreover Indian companies could be subject to similar licensing in other countries thereby hurting our interests.

Question 3: Is the growth of OTT impacting the traditional revenue stream of TSPs? If so, is the increase in data revenues of the TSPs sufficient to compensate for this impact? Please comment with reasons.
There is no justification for TSPs to charge for OTTs. This is a veiled attempt to sneak in private deals with OTT operators and then stifle competition and innovation. If TRAI supports this method maybe it should ask the Electric departments to have different prices depending on which Fan or Fridge I use in my home, or the Water department to charge based on which pot or bucket I use?

Question 4: Should the OTT players pay for use of the TSPs network over and above data charges paid by consumers? If yes, what pricing options can be adopted? Could such options include prices based on bandwidth consumption? Can prices be used as a means product/service differentiation? Please comment with justifications.
No. We need an open Internet. All traffic on the data stream must be treated equal without additional charges or Quality of Service limits. It’s perfectly alright for TSPs to charge for volume of data over their network, so users who use more pay more. But TSPs or TRAI should have no restrictions on what service is used. This will ensure that OTT companies that innovate to offer better speeds, security, reliability, data transfer, data compression, quality of service etc will have more users. The smallest of startups will have the opportunity to innovate and will provide a level playing field.

Question 5: Do you agree that imbalances exist in the regulatory environment in the operation of OTT players? If so, what should be the framework to address these issues? How can the prevailing laws and regulations be applied to OTT players (who operate in the virtual world) and compliance enforced? What could be the impact on the economy? Please comment with justifications.
We need an open Internet. All traffic on the data stream must be treated equal without additional charges or Quality of Service limits by TSPs. TRAI should have no restrictions on what service is used and this will ensure that OTT companies that innovate to offer better speeds, security, reliability, data transfer, data compression, quality of service etc will have more users. The smallest of startups will have the opportunity to innovate and will provide a level playing field. Any such regulation will hurt India’s start up IT and SaaS sector. It is the same reason why the same organizations including the same OTT players support Net Neutrality in the US and other western nations. The greedy TSPs in India are hurting India’s interest and India’s reputation of a free market and open society.

Question 6: How should the security concerns be addressed with regard to OTT players providing communication services? What security conditions such as maintaining data records, logs etc. need to be mandated for such OTT players? And, how can compliance with these conditions be ensured if the applications of such OTT players reside outside the country? Please comment with justifications.
While keeping security considerations in mind and ensuring that we have methods of legally intercepting any communications, We do not want a India to be a SECURITY STATE that spies on its own people. I believe that Freedom of thought and Freedom of expression must be absolute with the only caveat being directly inciting violence or causing personal injury, mental or physical.

Question 7: How should the OTT players offering app services ensure security, safety and privacy of the consumer? How should they ensure protection of consumer interest? Please comment with justifications.
Please do not treat consumers as if they are ignorant or stupid. Do ISPs have to be directly responsible for protection of consumers from viruses and hacking? Consumers will find ways to protect themselves and any service that risks this protection will be shunned automatically. A Free market will ensure that companies that misuse their trust will be pulled up. There are numerous instances where OTT services have been castigated both online and offline for not protecting consumer interest. I do not believe the TSPs should be entrusted to be gatekeepers for consumer protection as they themselves should be regulated and monitored.

Question 8: In what manner can the proposals for a regulatory framework for OTTs in India draw from those of ETNO, referred to in para 4.23 or the best practices summarised in para 4.29? And, what practices should be proscribed by regulatory fiat? Please comment with justifications.

Question 9: What are your views on net-neutrality in the Indian context? How should the various principles discussed in para 5.47 be dealt with? Please comment with justifications.
We need an open Internet. I believe that Freedom of thought and Freedom of expression must be absolute with the only caveat being directly inciting violence or causing personal injury, mental or physical. This proposal hurts India’s interest and India’s reputation of a free market and open society.

Question 10: What forms of discrimination or traffic management practices are reasonable and consistent with a pragmatic approach? What should or can be permitted? Please comment with justifications.
NONE. There is no reasonable practice for traffic management or QOS management. This is a misnomer and a sneaky attempt to favour certain OTTs and their traffic for a price. We need an open Internet that regulates itself through a free choice by consumers. The best email service will win, The best search service will win, The best ecommerce site will win, The best video streaming service will win.   We do not want the OTTs that make the deals with the TSPs to have an unfair advantage.

Question 11: Should the TSPs be mandated to publish various traffic management techniques used for different OTT applications? Is this a sufficient condition to ensure transparency and a fair regulatory regime?
There must be complete transparency and NO traffic management other than reasonable management to ensure low latency and packet management to ensure best service to all.

Question 12: How should a conducive and balanced environment be created such that TSPs are able to invest in network infrastructure and CAPs are able to innovate and grow? Who should bear the network upgradation costs? Please comment with justifications
Make sure that the government does not squeeze them too much on spectrum costs. Ensure good and fair competition among TSPs like any other utility provider on quality of service, signal strength and range and most of all customer service

Question 13: Should TSPs be allowed to implement non-price based discrimination of services? If so, under what circumstances are such practices acceptable? What restrictions, if any, need to be placed so that such measures are not abused? What measures should be adopted to ensure transparency to consumers? Please comment with justifications.
NONE No discrimination of services. Traffic /  Packet management based on OTT services should be made illegal.

Question 14: Is there a justification for allowing differential pricing for data access and OTT communication services? If so, what changes need to be brought about in the present tariff and regulatory framework for telecommunication services in the country? Please comment with justifications.
NO.

Question 15: Should OTT communication service players be treated as Bulk User of Telecom Services (BuTS)? How should the framework be structured to prevent any discrimination and protect stakeholder interest? Please comment with justification.
NO. This is a sneaky attempt to justify the QOS and traffic management.

Question 16: What framework should be adopted to encourage India-specific OTT apps? Please comment with justifications.
NONE. India Specific OTT Apps will gain appeal based on the quality and usefulness of the service. India specific OTT aps and do not need any special encouragement. We will compete in an open market fair and square. Just give us a level playing field

Question 17: If the OTT communication service players are to be licensed, should they be categorised as ASP or CSP? If so, what should be the framework? Please comment with justifications.
NONE. No licensing. This has the potential to backfire badly on global Indian OTT companies.

Question 18: Is there a need to regulate subscription charges for OTT communication services? Please comment with justifications.
NO.

Question 19: What steps should be taken by the Government for regulation of non-communication OTT players? Please comment with justifications.
NONE.

Question 20: Are there any other issues that have a bearing on the subject discussed?

Please support Net neutrality and a level playing field for all telecom or data services

Rohit Regonayak

Co-Founder & Director Technology
Trellisys.net Pvt Ltd.

Mobile: +91 98808 88188   |  Office:  +91 80 23337032 xtn: 27   | www.trellisys.net

Trellisys.net Pvt. Ltd. #572, 3rd Main, 2nd Block, R.T. Nagar, Bangalore - 560032. Karnataka, India.

Looking to create and publish your own book apps?