Subject: On the call for comments regarding OTT
From: Akshay S Dinesh
Date: 29-Mar-15 6:41 PM
To: advqos@trai.gov.in

Sir,
I have been an Internet user for the past 9 years as I look forward to using it more in the coming decades, I consider myself a stakeholder in this issue. Here are my answers to the questions you've posed in the document.

1. Your question is flawed. It sounds just like "Does everyone else know that you are mad?" The answer to your question is that there should be no regulatory framework for OTT services. OTT services based on India can come under Indian Penal Code and therefore they shall comply with Indian laws. You do not need to create extra regulations to "regulate" their operation.

2. There is no need for licensing regime. For two reasons, 1 it is impossible to license everyone. There are millions of services on the Internet (although you seem to know only about the most famous 10). And they'll keep growing. And it is impractical to think that services in remote countries should have license in India to work. The Internet doesn't work like that. 2, Licensing is a policy used more for control rather than for freedom. Controlling services that allows conversations and exchange of ideas is equivalent to censorship.

3. It does not matter if the growth of OTT are having an impact on the revenue of TSPs. If TSPs do not find providing that service profitable, they shouldn't provide that service. The very fact that they continue to do so, while pushing for more profit with devilous moves like these suggest that they have huge profits and they crave for more. If they are indeed running in loss, they're welcome to increase their data charges to compensate for their expenses. That is how business works. You levy the customer the costs you incur for providing a service.

4. Absolutely not. OTTs should in no way be charged for access to their users. It is like auto drivers asking shopping malls for money should they bring customers to their malls. If at all there is a cost, it is the customer who should pay it.

5. Internet has always been a bother for governments trying to enforce laws. It is a disbelief that the Internet can be or need to be controlled. There are mechanisms of control within the Internet. Messaging services lets you block people who are sending you unwanted messages. Malicious or spam emails are automatically filtered into spam folders. The user has absolutely full control of which service to use and which service not to use. The messages that are passed through OTTs are messages that citizens of India (or other countries) send to fellow citizens. When you're talking about regulating OTTs, youre actually talking about regulating this free speech.

6. As already answered in Questions 5 and 2, "security concerns" have no stand in the Internet. Even if you are to regulate all the existing OTTs, and keep conversation logs of every conversation ever had on these, a terrorist organization can simply create their own messaging system to have their own private conversation. You will never be able to catch any security threats by surveillance. On the other hand, surveillance will create deeper, more dangerous issues of intrusions by the state in to the privacy of the citizens.

7. OTTs can (and do) provide easy interfaces to prevent unwanted conversations and possibly a reporting mechanism that alerts abusive users to the site administrators. This can act as self checks without the need for any authority looking into it. Consumers should be provided with choice to switch players if they are unhappy with a particular OTT player

8. All these proposals are unacceptable since they damage the Internet. The best practices are actually not representative of the practices in the countries mentioned.

9. Prevention is better than cure. None of the issues mentioned in para 5.47 will arise if we do not bend down to the pressure for TSPs and keep Internet neutral.

10. No form of discrimination of OTT services is acceptable. The only form of discrimination that makes sense is that USERS who are paying less be given slower speed (uniform across any website they visit or any OTT they user)

11. Refer answer 9 and also the first two sentences of answer 1.

12. The TSPs are providing a service to their customer. Any cost that they incur should be compensated by charging their customer, that is Internet users.

13. Refer answer 11.

14. No. Already answered in answer 8. Also, any practice of trying to differentiate data access from OTT services would involve intrusions into privacy. This is unavoidable in such a system and therefore unacceptable.

15. No. Already answered in the above questions.

16. The Internet does not belong to any country. One has to grow up and think of the larger picture to understand how Internet works. It is what it is because of its global nature. "India-specific" OTT apps sounds like a ridiculous idea in the globalized world.

17. Not applicable. Refer answer 2.

18. Already answered in answer 5.

19. None. Already answered in answer 5.

20. Yes. The Internet is the largest public resource in the world. It is the greatest friend of free-speech, personal liberties. It creates a level playing field for individuals across different socio-cultural strata to improve their quality of life. There is no rich or poor, backward caste or forward caste, male, female or transgender, no difference between anyone for the Internet. On the Internet, everyone is equal. It is our only hope for a better future with a more equal society. Anything that damages the Internet, should be seen as a danger to the mankind itself.

Yours Sincerely,
Akshay S Dinesh
Student, Mysore Medical College
Mysore