Gentleman/Madam;

The following is my response to your “The paper invites citizens to voice their opinions on 20 questions based on the licensing of internet services in the country. You can respond to TRAI’s questions, listed below, by emailing advqos@trai.gov.in before April 24”.

Please note that I have quoted your question in blue letters and my responses are in red.

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, it is never too early to establish a regulatory framework provided (a) the framework will promote growth, (b) improve quality of services, and (c) foster competition to the advantage of the consumer at large.  In fact, a proactive and forward looking regulator is always preferred to an always reacting regulator.

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?

3.     No, because the consumer is already paying for the communication network provider’s services by way of paying for the data usage.  Having said that, it may be prudent to insist on OTT players to locate their service-support-hardware within the country for two reasons; (a) in the interest of national security and (b) it will promote economic growth and ensure that part of their earnings are ploughed back into the country’s economy.

4.     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?

5.     Definitely, any innovation in delivery of communication/data that is beyond the services provided by TSPs will impact their revenue stream.  This, however, does not imply that the aggregate revenue streams are negatively impacted.  I am not sure if I am qualified to answer the second half of the question.

6.     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?

7.     NO, OTT players are already paying to the TSP by proxy – the consumer.  Prices based on bandwidth consumption are opaque and the present experience indicates that the consumer is at the mercy and whims of the TSP.  Prices are already used as a means of product/service differentiation (the limiting speed of download/upload for different data charge packages).  In fact, there is a need to remove this basis of price differentiation.  The data bandwidth should be constant for all users and at all times with a limit to the usage imposed as per the budget that the consumer has set for himself in consultation with his TSP.

8.     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?

9.     Regulation beyond the one insisting on location of the OTT support-hardware within the country and the access to the security personnel of the country is the only regulation required.  Any thing beyond that will throttle the innovation and growth of the technology to the detriment of the consumer.

10. 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?

11.   I have already touched on the security issue above.  If it is not feasible/practical to locate support-service-hardware within the country then the OTT must agree to providing access to the same where ever they are located with the explicit agreement that our laws (laws & regulations of Republic of India) will apply when a request is made for such an access regardless of the location of the support-service-hardware and the location specific laws/regulations.

12. How should the OTT players offering app services ensure security, safety and privacy of the consumer? How should they ensure protection of consumer interest?

13.  These issues have been dealt with as part of the above.

14. 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?

15.  I am not qualified to answer these questions.

16. What are your views on net-neutrality in the Indian context?

17.  Net neutrality is paramount for equitable and rapid growth of communication and data exchange.  It is given that all communication and data exchanges take place in digitized form and they will use all available transmission resources seeking out the most efficient, reliable and cost-effective paths.  The future of humanity is inevitably intertwined with data-exchanges.  Any attempt to thwart efficient usage of all the resources available in most cost effective way will only end up throttling the growth of the economy and there by betterment of all.  Net neutrality will ensure that the resources are utilized in cost effective way for the betterment of all.

18. What forms of discrimination or traffic management practices are reasonable and consistent with a pragmatic approach? What should or can be permitted?

19. It is obvious that the present method of traffic management is opaque to the consumer and inefficient.  The consumer must have a choice (a) to set his budget and (b) enjoy the fastest data exchange that is possible till his budget is exhausted.

20.                        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?

21. The TSPs must NOT be allowed to discriminate amongst varying needs of the consumer for data exchange.  The consumer must be free to elect his chosen method of data exchange without any kind of interference from the TSP.

22.                        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?

23.First of all it must be agreed that the TSPs ARE MERELY FACILITATORS OF DATA EXCHANGE.  Having agreed to that the TSPs should be allowed to set their charges (revenue streams) solely based on data-exchanged by the various users of the TSP infrastructure.  These charges will be based on sound business decisions of Rate of Return on their investments which must include the ability to remain competitive by continually upgrading the infrastructure.  The TSPs always have an option of participating in creating content and/or applications that will enhance their competitiveness.

24.                        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?

25.The answer is an emphatic NO.

26.                        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?

27.These have been dealt with in detail earlier.

28.                        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?

29.                        If OTT communication service provider is generating revenues by (a) inserting advertisement/promotions as part of the service, &/or (b) by selling the user/usage data for data mining and/or data analytics in any way/shape/form then the OTT should be called a BuTS and the OTT should be charged accordingly.  However, in this case the consumer should get the benefit of rebate for the charges he has paid for the data exchange using the OTT platform.

30.What framework should be adopted to encourage India-specific OTT apps?

31.  In this age of borderless communication networks there should not be any discrimination between India-Specific and Universal OTT apps.

32.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?

33. Given that all applications and communications loose their identity once they are digitized I think it will be nearly impossible to differentiate between the two.  For example, is email provider an ASP if an attachment contains a voice-message?  How is written communication different from a voice communication or a visual  communication?  In short, no such categorization is warranted.

34.Is there a need to regulate subscription charges for OTT communication services?

35. NO, see detailed response above.

36.What steps should be taken by the Government for regulation of non-communication OTT players?

37. Other than what has already been suggested, NONE.

38.Are there any other issues that have a bearing on the subject discussed?

The only issue to be addressed is how not to strangle the innovation that is driving the OTT and how to ensure a level playing field for the ASPs and the OTT and the CONSUMER.  Also, equity in terms of affordability to all must be paramount along with the reliability, efficiency and cost-effective use of the available resources.

I appreciate the opportunity to participate in the deliberations and look forward to your feedback regarding the final outcome of the consultation.

Sincerely,

Yogesh Lavingia.