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. There are no advantages f having a regulatory framework. Best not to try to subsidise or promote inferior technologies or lobbies. Let the best technology group/individual win.
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.
If i tell a joke to my friends, do you need me to acquire a license to tell a joke first? I hope not. Do not curtail freedom of speech indirectly by promoting only certain means of communication over others.
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.
TSPs are NOT losing anything. IF at all they really believe that tha
t
have not grow
n beyond their own high expectations, it is likely due to the fact that their dreams weren't backed by sufficent and timely actions. Being anti consumer slow moving dinosaurs and adopting the best technologies in a hope to squeeze out a few more rupees out of the long tail of their last decade's investments is a sleazy tactic to say the least. TSPs needs to be held account
able for their anti-consumer non-competing attitude toward adopting newer and better business models.
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 of
product/service differentiation? Please comment with justifications.
No. Please do NOT allow any differentiation whatsoever. As is mentioned in the very first point in section1 on page 4 of the Consultation Paper On Regulatory Framework for Over the top (OTT) services (OTT-CP-27032015.pdf) dated 27 March 2015, everything is bytes.
Drawing artificial boundaries to separate any 2 pieces of data is akin to segregation between any 2 consumers. Allowing prioritising or even classifying "bytes" based on their source or nature or destination will allow a particular sub-section of the consumer citizens who access "bytes" from a particular service to have higher priority over the rest. This is clearly not acceptable if we really want to continue to be a democracy and not prioritise a sub-section of the society at the cost of the rest.
No differentiation. No special pricing.
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.
Any attempt to regulate is likely to lead us down to a poor state of economy as regulation is anti-innovation and stifles competition and improvement of infrastructure by removing the incentives to improvement. Kindly refrain from any attempt at regulation of a soon to be basic right - i.e. equal access to the internet.
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.
This "problem" has already been solved. Security standards already exist. Countries and corporations follow them too. Get in touch with industry experts to be able to enrich your own knowledge before identifying a suitable standard for India to mandate for it OTT players. Please do NOT approach the so called famous pillars of the Indian IT industry a.k.a. the IT sweatshops the services industry. Please make it public. Adopt social media. Everyone's voice is heard. The TSPs cannot stifle your voice. They cannot charge consumers Rs.1000 to access http://trai.gov.in (yet). People will participate in this endeavour and the best solution will rise to the top. Check how Stackoverflow.com works.
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.
Do not get into it right now. Start by establishing advisory behavior that is recommended for ensuring consumer privacy and safety. For security refer above question 6.
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.
No. Please do NOT allow ETNO to have such preferred pricing arrangements with OTT providers. Bytes are bytes. No discrimination between bytes. If an individual ever had a more efficient solution than a corporation should the corporation be allowed to stifle the individual's right to provide such a service by engaging in a partnership (anti-competitive in nature) with the TSPs to ensure that the corporation's service is prioritised in effect de-prioritising the individual's service? No! Why are we even entertaining such requests from ETNO!!
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.
Agree on user-choice, perfect transparency, no switching costs by following compatible standards, and well-define quality assruances in termes of bandwith, latency and total amount of "bytes".
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.
At the moment, none that would be unique to India. Any 2 bytes that provide equivalent service must be prioritised equally without differentiating them neither on the basis of the prouducer nor the consumer.
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?
Why is the thought of separating OTT even being entertained?
No, TSPs cannot to allowed to differentiate OTT from any other "Bytes". Period.
This discourages charging for services that TSPs have no right.
Question 12: How should the 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.
Allow TSPs to compete for the privilege to participate in India. As all corporations/individuals do, TSPs themselves need to bear their costs themselves.
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.
Permit acceptable amount of prioritisation during national emergency or natural disasters. What is acceptable needs to be defined apriori and accepted and signed-off by the general public.
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 justifications for differential pricing. Please do NOT ruin the single most important means India has at a better future.
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.
Ok. Framework that allows various BuTSes to compete equally is preferable.
Question 16: What framework should be adopted to encourage India specific
OTT apps? Please comment with justifications.
This is not a priority.
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.
CSP. They are after all proving a critical communication service essential to normal operation of the Republic on India.
Question 18: Is there a need to regulate subscription charges for
OTT communication services? Please comment with justifications.
Come up with recommended ranges right now. The limits can be enforced if the situation worsens in near future.
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 reduce the barrier to participation. Its is very good that atleast the website loaded properly and easily accessible well formatted electronic document is common format is a very good step towards encouraging everyone to participate. Consider models like stackoverflow.com or surveymonkey objective-type surveys which make it extremely easy and less time-consuming to express individual opinion. Also the metrics and analytics data obtained thus will allow faster process and a more in-depth analysis of opinions to obtain more meani n
gful
information within the data thus properly collected.