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.

Answers: I believe there is no need of a framework for OTT services, as by implementing such framework the control will go to the telecom operators who provide this services and this will hamper the chance of new companies as they will not have enough power and money to compete thereby eradicating the levelplaying field for each.

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.

Answer: The answer is a simple NO. This will kill the investment and business opportunities from companies which reside outside India. . Internet is simply a resource like electricity. Anyone anywhere with can use it without the generation company deciding which appliance will use how much.

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.

Answer: As per the financial results of the TSP, the question does not make any sense. Every big TSP has an increase in its revenue by more than 20% from previous years. 

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.

Answer : The question is being repetitive. The answer is NO. 

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.

Answer: What we need is a regulation to make sure TSP’s are not exploiting customers via exorbitant data prices and uninformed policy changes

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.

Answer: Firstly, Security concerns are all under the purview of the home ministry, therefore it is illogical for TRAI to even come up with such a question. 

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.

Answer: All app developers have a privacy policy as well as run a support email regarding questions. In order to maintain safety, privacy, and security, I recommend the following:

1.      Encryption 

2.      Use of digital certificates

3.      A privacy policy 

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.

Answer:  India should not drive any policy from the EU directly, since the market in EU and india are completely different. India barely has 20% internet penetration whereas the EU has is 100%. Therefore, saying it short, India does not need a regulatory framework to boss over OTT providers.

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.

Answer: Net neutrality is the need of the hour in India.Net Neutrality is a founding principle of the Internet which guarantees that telecoms operators remain mere transmitters of information and do not discriminate between different users, their communications or content accessed. 

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.

Answer: Of course, the principle of Net neutrality does not prevent an operator to engage in traffic management practices consistent and enforceable framework to assess whether traffic management practices are reasonable – i.e. whether they actually seek to protect the freedom of communication of end-users – and when they are not. In the view of many stakeholders, there are two situations in which such practices are legitimate:

Unforeseeable and temporary congestion: When a wireless or land-line network goes through a period of unforeseen congestion (e.g. in the case of equipment failure), network operators are entitled to temporarily implement discriminatory traffic management practices in order to ensure to fluidity of data streams. But every time, operators must be able to prove to the regulatory authority that such congestion of its network was not foreseeable and that it took necessary steps to correct it. If the deployment of very high broadband networks takes longer than expected and operators face a durable saturation of their network, then the available bandwidth should be shared equally between all the subscribers and all service providers, until operators invest to upgrade their infrastructure.

Security threat on the network: In case of an sudden attack or all other event undermining the proper operation of the network, discriminatory practices are also legitimate. But they should be circumscribed to temporary traffic hazards. Malicious actions aiming at altering the global operation of the network, whether intentional or accidental, should be considered as attacks. Traffic hazards needs to be addressed through temporary measures, either manually – when irregular traffic is detected – or automatically – when such traffic hazards are already well-known. The duration of these measures should not exceed that of the attack. They should be made transparent in order to foster collaboration among the community of network operators and allow for both a sound diagnosis of security threats and for the adoption of the most adequate methods to deal with them. 

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?

Answer: There is no transparency or fair pricing regime in India. Therefore to impose trust on a corporate entity would be to put you face inside a cannon about to fire. I don’t trust our TSP’s therefore I oppose the traffic management techniques for OTT apps.

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

Answer: Firstly, TSP’s must leave OTT apps alone. They are not eating into their revenues, but are aiding them in growth. What is the need of the hour is, to make their business model viable. 

The stupidest part of the Telco's contention is this

- We invest on the networks and the apps ride on this without paying anything.

This is as stupid as saying that the electricity company invest a lot on the electricity networks and power generation and the fan and light manufacturers get a free ride on it.The people who use fans and lights pay the electricity companies for the electricity, just like the people who use Whatsapp and Skype pay the Telcos for data.

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.

Answer : No, TSPs cant be allowed to discriminate. This question is the same as ones above and is simply reframed. 

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.

Answer: The only justification for allowing differential pricing for data access and OTT communication services is corporate greed. There is NO JUSTIFICATION in discrimination. 

This is a stretch : To make sure that corporations do not discriminate, random checks should be done by a Govt. entity like pinging the service timely and setting up a portal if necessary to register consumer complaints whenever they see such discrimination like say blocking at night peak time. Many would be spam and useless, but that’s that.

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.

Answer: There is no need for treating OTT as anything. They are just services found on the internet. All that TSP’s need to concentrate on is to provide better data packs and suitable tariffs in order to earn money. For example, the data packs in India still start at 50 MB while the world has moved on. TSP’s need to innovate to survive. However, when a service provider breaks the neutrality of the network, new entrants become vulnerable to unfair competition, given that their access to the Internet infrastructure can be restricted. Obviously, powerful actors in the telecom industries have an interest in imposing their control over information and communication networks. They do so by, for instance, banning innovative VOIP applications from mobile telecommunications services.Anti-Net neutrality practices are thus fundamentally anti-competitive and harm consumers as well as economic growth. They discourage innovation and result in rent-seeking behaviors from established players. They put barriers to entry which prevent the emergence of the "next Skype" or "next Google". It follows that an open and equitable access to the communications infrastructure is the foundation of social and economic benefits and needs to be preserved.

Question 16: What framework should be adopted to encourage India-specific OTT apps? Please comment with justifications.

Answer: Already, there are quite a few number of indian OTT apps, however, to help them, a “NET NEUTRALITY” framework is a must. There should be no discrimination or favouritism in apps done by TSP’s because their company owns the OTT app, that way a conducive competition enabled environment can be created.

Define the principle of network neutrality. First, the specific architectural principles of the Internet should be recognized in the regulatory framework through the definition of the Internet as a public electronic communications network abiding by the principle of Net neutrality. This principle would rule out any discrimination based on the source, destination or actual content of the data transmitted over the network. ISPs would be compelled to respectthis principle by giving an equal treatment to all data flows and guaranteeing final users the freedom to 1) send and receive the content, services and applications of their choice; 2) use or run the application and services of their choice; 3) connect to the network and run any program of their choice, as long as they do not harm the network.

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.

Answer: Please DO NOT license OTT players. There is no need for it as of today. Please uphold the principle of net neutrality and leave OTT players alone.It is an obvious breach of Net neutrality is the blocking of certain protocols or applications by IAPs as a way to undermine competition. In some instances, the use of these services is subject to extra fees. The most oft-cited example of such discriminatory practices is that of the voice-over-IP (VOIP) application Skype. Although the blocking of VOIP on wireless networks has been abandoned by a few IAPs in recent months, many of them still engage in this kind of anti-competitive behaviors and will continue to do so in the future for other innovative services in the absence of Net neutrality regulation.

Question 18: Is there a need to regulate subscription charges for OTT communication services? Please comment with justifications.

Answer: There is NO NEED to regulate any services offered over the internet. Please do not kill the idea of a free and fair internet. All telcos are protected by the govt, and OTT players are not. Therefore to say that TSP’s are making losses and thus asking to control OTT players is wrong.

Question 19: What steps should be taken by the Government for regulation of non-communication OTT players? Please comment with justifications.

Answer: The govt must enact legislation to establish net neutrality in order to promote business in OTT apps. Even TSP’s can offer their own OTT apps and use advertising as a means to generate revenue. There is no need for regulation of OTT players.Both the Internet and managed services should be defined in the regulatory framework and steps taken to ensure that the development of managed services will not occur at the expense of the Internet. According to the French national regulatory authority (Arcep), managed services are acceptable as long as they "respect competition laws and sector- specific regulation, and provided that the managed service does not degrade the quality of Internet access". Such degradation would occur if, for instance, an operator decided to allocate the vast majority of its bandwidth to managed services, thereby depriving the Internet access from sufficient network capacities.

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

Answer :

1.      Pricing of packs sold by TSP’s : the pricing of the plans sold by TSP’s is arbitrary and not controlled, therefore it is quite clear that rates across the board remain same and therefore it is hampering the customers experience. Prices are unnecessarily inflated.

2.      No net neutrality law : A draft has been attached with this reply.

3.      TRAI has not interfered or made a statement on past violations of policies by TSP’s. TRAI must respond to such things and enforce policies more effectively.