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.

Ans : There should be a regulatory framework for OTT services since it's easier to implement at an early stage and thus will have more acceptance. 

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.

Ans: No, OTT players offering communication services should not be brought under the licensing regime. This will limit the growth of technological advances as new apps and innovations from start ups will be discouraged. It will also place India at a disadvantage since a licensing regime would discourage OTT players to open their services in India or least delay the launch.

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.

Ans: Yes, The growth in data revenues is more than sufficient to compensate for this impact. According to the TRAI paper Consultation Paper On Regulatory Framework for Over-the-top (OTT) services on page 34, point number 2.54 it says that global losses to telecoms due to 'lost' reveune of voice call etc will be $479 billion but that the profit to them from data will be 2.4 trillion. I think It is more than sufficient to over come the loss over traditional revenue stream.

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.

Ans: No, OTT players need not pay for the use of TSPs network over and above data charges paid by consumers. The analogy used by Telecom operators is that people need to pay toll for the roadways that are being built. But we don't ask the car manufacturers to pay the toll. So equivalently, we should not ask the OTT services to pay for the bandwidth. The customers are already paying for it.

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.

Ans: If regulations are imposed on OTT in favor of telecom operators then there would an imbalance which would be hard to correct. It would be dependent on the control of the telecoms which apps are encouraged and which are not and this would be grossly unfair.

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.

Ans: Security concerns can be address by the OTT operators using better encryption. It is in interest of the app developers to develop apps which are secure and so this issue is already being addressed by developers. So there is no need for TRAI to further impose conditions regarding the same.

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.

Ans: Better encryption ensure better privacy. This is a technological issue which needs to be solved rather than a regulatory issue. 

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.

Ans: ETNO recommendations are not applicable in India because the markets are substantially different. India barely has 20% internet penetration whereas the EU has is 100%. 

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.

Ans: Net neutrality everywhere in the world deals with the same thing. It is the embodiment of one of the fundamental right of equality and consumer choice. With the amount of apps and innovations increasing daily, it is not feasible for telecom operators to provide transparent and sufficient information on all OTT services for the consumer to make an informed choice. Besides it would be next to impossible to figure out if the telecom operators are giving biased information and thus skewing the consumer choice.

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.

Ans: Only for unexpected congestion, 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.

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?

Ans: Even if TSPs are publishing various traffic management techniques, it would not ensure net neutrality. Plus traffic management techniques are a technical topic and it would require expertise in the subject for understanding the implications in the different techniques used by the TSPs.

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

Ans: If TSPs need to stay competitive then they need to invest in network infrastructure. The network upgradation costs are borne by the customers when they pay for better services. This is the reason why 3G is more expensive than GPS and 4G will be more expensive than 3G. By providing better service the telecom companies can charge more. The revenue from the increased usage of data from the OTT will help TSPs build better infrastructure.

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.

Ans: No, TSPs should not be allowed any form of discrimination of service. The app space follow a free market economy. This means that apps which provide better value to the customer survive and not necessarily the apps which have the most money. By implementing a discrimination of services, this would get disrupted as the apps/OTTs which can afford to pay the telecoms for more bandwidth would get prominence even if the service they provide is of inferior quality to another similar service. Also the logic that the bandwidth infrastructure provided by TSP should only be for data delivered by them is counterproductive as they don't have the expertise in creating quality content.

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.

Ans: No, there is no justification for allowing differential pricing for data access. If a particular consumer is using apps which use more bandwidth, then he's also paying for the extra data. I don't see why any app/OTT should be punished for it's popularity. Beside, a fair playing field is the only way we can ensure innovation and growth in the Indian developer community. 

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.

Ans: Treating OTT communication service players as BuTS would result in two situations. One, unfair advantage of corporates with money over start ups. Two, Indian consumer would miss out on innovations and apps from the world at large. In both cases, the Indian consumer loses cutting edge innovations. Also it would be difficult to track if the TSPs are double dipping, ie charging both the OTT player and the customer for the data used.

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

Ans: Implementing net neutrality would be step one in encouraging India based start ups for OTT apps. Giving them a fair chance to succeed because of their innovation and technical expertise instead of their financial backing is more likely to ensure India specific OTT apps. 

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.

Ans: In page 88, point 5.34 of the Consultation paper states that "Experts claim, more than 60 percent of Web content is created by regular people, not corporations". By  categorising OTT services as ASP or CSP, we would be penalizing the start ups and regular people who provide content or services. Also, there is no justification for punishing an OTT service app just because it is popular. The revenue from the increased usage of data from the OTT will help TSPs. Charging extra for OTT services will not increase the use of the TSP services, instead it will lead to a decline of both OTT app  usage as well TSP services. 

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

Ans: Most OTT services don't have a subscription charge instead earn their revenue though ads. So by regulating subscription charges we would force the OTT services to pass on the burden to it's customers. This would mean that the Internet would take longer to penetrate the Indian market as the cost of entry increases for the average customer. Also the logic that the bandwidth infrastructure provided by TSP should only be for data delivered by them is counterproductive. 

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

Ans: As non-communication OTT players don't disrupt the TSP services in any way, I don't see the need for regulation by government. 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.

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

Ans: India is lagging behind the United States and the EU in the development of innovative services and applications. Yet, if the anti-Net Neutrality provisions currently contained in the Telecoms package were passed, the situation could dangerously aggravate. 

India has the worst internet speeds in India, according to AKAMAI report(Page 25 onwards). Instead of focusing on OTT players, TRAI needs to drive policy in such a way so as to improve customer experience in India because in the last 10 years we have not improved in this sector, and we rank worse in Asia, even below the growth of countries such as phillipines, Vietnam and china are moving far ahead us.

One related key aspect is to recognize that site or domain-wide filtering is an extremely serious measure impacting freedom of information and communication. Obviously, any attempt to mandate such measures without a prior judiciary decision under a fair and equitable trial is in contradiction to fundamental rights.

Regards,

Divya Uthup