This is Rohn Malhotra, 29, from Bangalore. I'm not an advocate, a net neutrality lobbyist or even a techie. I am only responding to provide a laymans perspective on net neutrality with a basic understanding of the issue, the perspective of each party involved and the long term implications.
Pls stick to the principles of Net Neutrality. Promote a free internet. It is more beneficial to everyone in the long term
Answers to the questions below
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?
Yes perhaps a regulatory framework is required for OTTs and content providers. Much in the same way regulatory frameworks exist for Sugar, Automobile or Telecom sectors. They are effectively a new industry and will require regulation at some level to protect consumers. But this does not necessarily have to come from a public authority. Private regulation through the establishment of lobbies which have representation from the OTTs, general public as well as some government involvement could also define standards.
But right now building such a framework should be more from the perspective of monitoring rather than restriction. Since the industry is such a nascent stage, any form of restrictions could have a detrimental impact in the long term. For now oversight and time invested in understanding, rather than regulation is the need of the hour.
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?
I don't have an understanding of what a Licensing regime means but prima facie it seems too strong a measure. Being a registered service provider either under a regulatory authority would be sufficient.
3. Is the growth of OTT impacting the traditional revenue stream of telecom service providers (TSPs)? If so, is the increase in data revenues of the TSPs sufficient to compensate for this impact?
Yes it is but I don't understand why that is an an issue that concerns the public in any way. Are TSPs concerned when my salary is reduced because my firm hired a smarter guy?
While traditional revenue streams of TSP's might be on the decline but that does not mean that protection of their revenue comes at the cost of innovation and a free internet. That would be like limiting the number of touch screen phones that can be sold because key pad manufacturers were losing money. Revenue streams of service providers should not influence governement policy.
The only additional source of revenue that should be available to the TSPs is increasing charges for data services. Free market dynamics will ensure that a fair price is set. Instead of trying to obtain revenues from OTTs, TSPs should focus to providing quality services that end users are willing to pay premiums for.
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?
Having OTT service providers pay for use of TSP networks would effectively kill any innovation or the emergence of new services for end users since startups would not be able to compete with bigger companies. Also since this would become a service agreement, TSPs would effectively be empowered to decide which services can be utilised by the end users through price discrimination and in a worst case, possibly refuse to provide service to certain OTTs and content providers. The basic principles of a free internet require that the TSPs provide the highway on which internet traffic moves, for which they are paid a fair price by users as determined by market forces. They should not get to decide how much to charge each individual vehicle for traveling on that highway.
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?
As mentioned in Ans 1, yes some form of regulation is required, private or public. Prevailing laws and compliance regulations would probably not taken into account the nuances of this new industry so is best that tailored laws are drafted. Impact should be minimal as long as they are not restrictive.
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?
Security is paramount and I agree that OTT players should be subject to the laws regarding monitoring and providing access to records that are prevalent in the country in which they provide service. Legal issues regarding how that is to be enforced are complicated but in essence OTTs should agree to what should effectively be a 'terms and conditions' of providing service in a geography.
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?
A private or public regulatory authority should set a benchmark for minimum security and privacy standards that all OTTs and content providers must adhere to.
8. In what manner can the proposals for a regulatory framework for OTTs in India draw from those of European Telecommunications Network Operators (ETNO)? What practices should be proscribed by regulatory fiat?
Am not familiar enough with the ETNO framework to comment. Though having access to people who are experts and employing them as consultants should be not difficult at all.
9. What are your views on net-neutrality in the Indian context?
I think net-neutrality does not have a geographic, political, social or economic context. Freedom is freedom wherever you are. In fact if anything the internet is the one place where geography is notional.
10. What forms of discrimination or traffic management practices are reasonable and consistent with a pragmatic approach? What should or can be permitted?
No form of discrimination or traffic management is acceptable. Much in the same way freedom of speech comes with basic qualifiers such as security of state, public order etc. only those basic qualifiers should be applicable.
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?
Yes TSPs should standardise and make traffic management techniques public to ensure that they are transparent and applied in the same way to all OTT service providers. Whether that is sufficient is unknown but is also unlikely, other suitable techniques should be explored.
12. How should a conducive and balanced environment be created such that TSPs are able to invest in network infrastructure and Content and Application Providers (CAPs) are able to innovate and grow? Who should bear the network upgradation costs?
TSPs charge customers for using their network. It is their responsibility to ensure that it is well maintained. Dynamics of cost sharing for upgradation between TSPs and content providers can be explored between them but content providers cannot be forced to bear such costs. This responsibility falls primarily on TSPs. Once again, fair market rules will naturally ensure that TSPs who do not invest in upgradation will become obsolete as new technology evolves.
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?
As mentioned earlier, discrimination of any form should not be allowed.
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?
There is no justification for differential pricing. All content providers are using the same resource - bandwidth. How that bandwidth is utilised should not influence pricing structures. Such a thought process reeks of sour grapes from TSPs for not anticipating how advancements in technology could lead to extinction of a revenue source.
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?
Often OTTs are considered BuTS only if their service becomes widely adopted. Until then they use bandwidth much the same way any other content provider does. They should not be discriminated against for having a more popular service.
16. What framework should be adopted to encourage India-specific OTT apps?
Promoting entrepreneurship in this country by making it easy for individuals to set up companies is sufficient. There is no dearth of ideas.
17. If the OTT communication service players are to be licensed, should they be categorised as Application Service Providers (ASP) or Communications Service Providers (CSP)? If so, what should be the framework?
As mentioned earlier, licensing to me is unclear however to answer the question a clear definition of what exactly is the difference between an ASP and a CSP would be required for an individual to bucket an OTT as one or the other. Besides there would be no blanket rule, each OTT or content provider would most likely have to be assessed individually.
18. Is there a need to regulate subscription charges for OTT communication services?
Certainly not for now. OTTs should be free to charge whatever they want to for services provided. Customers will provide the regulation via service adoption. Pricing regulation may be required in the future, if for some reason the industry becomes a matter of public concern.
19. What steps should be taken by the Government for regulation of non-communication OTT players?
As mentioned earlier, focus should be on understanding and oversight rather than regulation.
20. Are there any other issues that have a bearing on the subject discussed?
None that come to mind now.
The internet should remain free for anybody to provide service without restriction or discrimination. Users will decide what works and what doesn't, not TSPs.
To give you an idea of how ridiculous such a proposal is, Net Neutrality is an issue that gets support from Google, Facebook, Amazon and other companies which are some of the biggest and most valuable corporations in the world, along with activists and all sorts of independent organisations. It is not often that both these groups are on the same side.
Warm regards,
--
Rohn Malhotra