I
am writing to express my concern against the actions telecom carriers
are taking to restrict fair access to the internet (i.e. Net
Neutrality). As a thriving and growing nation, the internet is a vital
resource - it helps me communicate, work, and thrive as a citizen. If
telecom operators are allowed to discriminate the flow of internet
traffic solely on the basis of which services pay the most, we are
allowing telecoms control over a vital and necessary technological
resource. We allow them to define what information we can view; what
entertainment we can access; and what companies can innovate. This is
completely unfair and harms India's long term role as major player in
the global market.
I understand the concern that regulation may deter telecoms from
expanding access and speeds, but I strongly believe the growth of
telecoms and the well-being of the internet can go hand-in-hand. I'm not
asking for regulation so strong as to stifle progress, but only a
framework to ensure long term and fair access for all services
regardless of size.
Please understand that the internet is an important resource and vital
to me. I would like to see it protected under Net Neutrality to ensure
fair and equal access for myself and all.
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: 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 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.
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.
Regards
Abhinab Chetia
India,Assam