Question 1: Is it too early to establish a regulatory framework for Internet/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, of course it is too early, as in fact it shall remain for all eternity to come as it shall never be constitutional to do so, barring drastic changes in the Constitution of India itself, or the interpretation thereof. The classification of these services themselves as 'Over the Top' is problematic as we are paying for usage of bandwidth and should be allowed to use what we are paying for as we see fit. It is not up to ISP's or regulatory bodies like TRAI to dictate what is 'Over the Top' especially when these services do not cost any more to provide than others.
Now, you: why should they be? There is no developed country on earth with such a framework.
Question 2: Should the Internet/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: No, of course not. The Licence/Permit Raj is over, thank you very much.
We have already seen the effects of overbearing regulations on businesses and business practices. This exercise is being undertaken at the behest of entrenched parties who have established an oligopoly and will only serve to discourage competition. As a young entrepreneur I view these developments with great distaste and trepidation.
Now, you: why should they be? There is no developed country on earth with such a regime.
Question 3: Is the growth of Internet/OTT impacting the traditional revenue stream of Telecom operators/Telecom operators? If so, is the increase in data revenues of the Telecom Operators sufficient to compensate for this impact? Please comment with reasons.
Answer: No, of course not, because, yes, of course. Are they paying reparations to former telegram and fixed line telephone service providers whose 'traditional revenue streams' were affected by their businesses? In fact, they are generating extra revenue through the sale of overpriced internet services, which they are not able to adequately support and maintain.
I am not a satisfied customer and have lost much business of my own due to the incompetence of service providers who know I do not have an alternative. Shouldn't I be compensated? Comment with justifications.
Question 4: Should the Internet/OTT players pay for use of the Telecom Operators 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 of product/service differentiation? Please comment with justifications.
Answer: No, no, of course not. I am paying for my bandwidth and will use it as I see fit. The Government is advised that any attempt to make customers pay twice will cost it badly.
Question 5: Do you agree that imbalances exist in the regulatory environment in the operation of Internet/OTT players? If so, what should be the framework to address these issues? How can the prevailing laws and regulations be applied to Internet/OTT players (who operate in the virtual world) and compliance enforced? What could be the impact on the economy? Please comment with justifications.
Answer: No. I do not agree. What imbalance are you speaking of? Please comment with justifications.
Question 6: How should the security concerns be addressed with regard to Internet/OTT players providing communication services? What security conditions such as maintaining data records, logs etc. need to be mandated for such Internet/OTT players? And, how can compliance with these conditions be ensured if the applications of such Internet/OTT players reside outside the country? Please comment with justifications.
Answer: The Government has already ensured it gets access to encrypted data streams when required, as demonstrated with its treatment of Research in Motion, the creators of Blackberry, in a past case. I do not believe 'security' is a sufficient concern to justify such overarching infringement of citizens privacy, and is in fact a bogeyman used to generated terror and enable draconian legislation, of the sort clearly intended by TRAI.
Question 7: How should the Internet/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: By adopting state-of-the-art and best practices as demonstrated worldwide.
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 or the best practices? And, what practices should be proscribed by regulatory fiat? Please comment with justifications.
Answer: As stated above, no such framework is neccessary which infringes on our basic human rights.
Question 9: What are your views on net-neutrality in the Indian context? How should the various principles be dealt with? Please comment with justifications.
Answer: Net-neutrality is basic to the rightful functioning of the internet in any context. The victimization argument forwarded by entrenched oligarchic ISP's with billion-dollar net worth's in one the fastest growing and most profitable markets in the world is and incredibly specious and audacious one.
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: Nothing which infringes net-neutrality.
Question 11: Should the Telecom Operators 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: Never. Net-neutrality is non-negotiable.
Question 12: How should the conducive and balanced environment be created such that Telecom Operators 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: Through the free market, and not through coercive legislation. The electric companies do not charge makers of air-conditioners. The companies should bear the costs themselves and will recover it through proper pricing of the services they provide.
Question 13: Should Telecom Operators 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: Never. Net-neutrality is non-negotiable.
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: Never. Net-neutrality is non-negotiable.
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: Data is data, and all data is equal. Net-neutrality is non-negotiable.
Question 16: What framework should be adopted to encourage India specific OTT apps? Please comment with justifications.
Answer: None. Useful apps will flourish in a large market like India. Net-neutrality is non-negotiable.
Question 17: If the App based/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: No segregation required. Net-neutrality is non-negotiable.
Question 18: Is there a need to regulate subscription charges for App based/OTT communication services? Please comment with justifications.
Answer: Never. Net-neutrality is non-negotiable.
Question 19: What steps should be taken by the Government for regulation of non-communication App based/OTT players? Please comment with justifications.
Answer: None. Net-neutrality is non-negotiable.
Question 20: Are there any other issues that have a bearing on the subject discussed?
Answer: Keep the internet free, open and equal. Uphold the basic rights of our citizens. Discourage monopolistic and oligargchic trade practices. TRAI is a body designed to protect consumers from exploitation by the service providers who will not lose an opportunity to gouge them. Please realign yourself with these principles instead of those of crony capitalism. Net-neutrality is non-negotiable.