Dear Sir,
Please find my to cents on the matter
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.
Answer: Yes it is and it always will be because there should be no regulation over OTT services.
Reason:
OTT services are just like any other Internet website like Facebook or
Google. When you allow providers to regulate some of the Internet-based
services you are opening a Pandora's box. It means providers can control
any Internet-based activity and that will be the end of Internet
freedom as we know it.
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 and justification same as for question #1.
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: No it is not.
Reason:
The TSPs revenues are only increasing because the more people use OTTs
the more Internet usage time they will need to buy from the providers.
When TSPs saw how popular OTT applications are they decided they need to
find a way to monetise that. When a user pays to use WhatsApp or viber
they are actually paying TSPs money for using the data that the user
already paid for! This is so unjust that I cannot believe how they could
even think of making such a demand.
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: No they should not.
Reason:
Again I want to assert that this is no different from making, say,
Google pay the TSP a fee for every time an Internet user performs a
search. This is completely against the idea of net neutrality. There
should not be any pricing options because there should not be any price
at all.
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: OTT applications should not be regulated.
Reason: Mentioned above.
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:
The laws should not allow law enforcement authorities to access a
user's personal conversations and other data unless there is a matter of
national security.
permalink
[–]wiseIdiot 4 points 1 day ago*
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:
OTTs should take measures to ensure only the sender and the recipients
are able to view or delete their messages and pictures. Programmers or
database administrators should not be able to access that kind of
information. Encryption keys and algorithms must be known only to
computers. In case of legal authorities requiring access they need to
obtain an order from the supreme court asking the OTT provider to do so.
In that case special algorithms can be run to extract the required
records.
Reason: Right to privacy is extremely important in the information age.
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: Neither paragraph 4.23 should be applicable for reasons mentioned above.
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 of supreme importance in any country. As for
paragraph 5.47 the transparency aspect is just a set of vague outlines.
They need to be re-worded using more concrete terms in such a way that
TSPs shall not be able to deny responsibility when the guidelines are
not satisfactorily met.
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: The OTTs should not have any control over what can be transmitted through their services.
Reason:
Because that kind of control can be misused by OTTs in the same way
regulation laws can be exploited by TSPs in ways that are completely
against the concept of net neutrality.
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: No because there should not be a regulatory regime because of the reasons mentioned above.
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: The TSPs alone should be responsible for network maintenance.
Reason:
Making CAPs pay money to TSPs in return for network usage is
counter-productive because a large chunk of the TSP's income come from
the users of OTT services.
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: A huge NO!
Reason:
TSPs being able to discriminate services based on factors other than
price means they will be able to restrict the usage of a particular
service to users as well as throttle the bandwidth of CAPs as a way to
coerce more money from them.
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: No.
Reasons: Same as for questions #1, #2, and #14.
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: No.
Reason:
Because that would mean (eventually) we're back to making users pay for
the data that they already paid for. In addition TSPs will be able to
control the data traffic based on the source which would mean that net
neutrality is violated. Also stopping TSPs from incentivising their own
services or double-dipping is going to be an impossible task both in
theory and in practice when they have complete control over the traffic;
and especially so with the state of corruption in our bureaucracy.
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: No.
Reason:
Because that would mean (eventually) we're back to making users pay for
the data that they already paid for. In addition TSPs will be able to
control the data traffic based on the source which would mean that net
neutrality is violated. Also stopping TSPs from incentivising their own
services or double-dipping is going to be an impossible task both in
theory and in practice when they have complete control over the traffic;
and especially so with the state of corruption in our bureaucracy.
Question 16: What framework should be adopted to encourage India-specific OTT apps? Please comment with justifications.
Answer: There should be no regulation and no framework for reasons already stated above.
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: Same as for question #16.
Question
18: Is there a need to regulate subscription charges for OTT
communication services? Please comment with justifications.
Answer: No there is no need.
Justification: Provided above.
Question
19: What steps should be taken by the Government for regulation of
non-communication OTT players? Please comment with justifications.
Answer: The government should not regulate non-communication OTT players either.
Reason: Same as for questions #1, #2, and #14.
Question 20: Are there any other issues that have a bearing on the subject discussed?
Answer: Nothing that I can name off the top of my head right now.
With Warm Regards
--