In response to the Consultation Paper on Regulatory Framework for Over-the-top (OTT) services

Please click on the link: http://www.savetheinternet.in/ and with two clicks you can send a letter to the Chairman of TRAI to save Internet

My responses to the 20 questions are below. Long read. You can ignore it. But please click on the above link and send your response.

Dear Chairman Sir,

Thank you for allowing us, the users of Internet a chance to voice our opinion on the Regulatory Framework for OTT Services.

Open Internet is critical for our country as much as access to basic requirements like food, clothing, shelter and education.

I therefore urge TRAI to stand upright and protect the neutrality of the Internet for all Indians, and not be bowed down under pressure of few corporates.

I request that my response be published on the TRAI website alongside other comments filed, in line with past practice regarding public consultations. I urge that TRAI issue a specific response to user submissions after examining the concerns raised by them, and hold open house discussions across India, accessible to users and startups before making any recommendations.

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.

High Speed broadband should be provided across the country and people should be charged ONLY for using high-speed broadband infrastructure, which telecos are doing now anyway.

The services and the sites that are available right now on a low speed internet service and the same on high speed internet service should not be gatekept and regulated at any point of time.

Please note that Telecom companies who own the infrastructure for providing internet services are charging right now for the infrastructure and they are not discounting that. 

It seems they could simply not understand how services like facebook, google, whatsapp make money by using the same infrastructure. It is because they could make something useful and people are paying for using those services, just like we are using telecom infrastructure for accessing these services.

So yes, there should be no regulation introduced, since the infrastructure and communication in our country is already regulated.

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.

This is the dumbest suggestion that any teleco can demand. Just because they have started losing their voice and video call traffic to VOIP and are not able to charge for that, they are crying foul.

It is absolutely fair and any changes made in the data charging modus operandi is going to hurt the telecos.

Since now their competition is not their other competitors and services like Whatsapp and Viber are eating into their voice data share, these corporates have ganged up together and trying to smooze you(TRAI). Please do not fall for it. Stand up for the rights of the masses and for their freedom.

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.

Gopal Vittal, CEO, Airtel

“There is still no evidence that suggests that there is cannibalization,” he said when asked about whether data is cannibalizing Airtel’s voice business. On internet messaging cannibalizing SMS revenues, he said: “At this point in time is very, very tiny. And so it is not really material as we look at it.”

[http://www.medianama.com/2015/02/223-no-evidence-of-voip-cannibalization-of-voice-airtel-india-ceo-gopal-vittal/]

Vittorio Colao, CEO, Vodafone

“Growth in India has accelerated again (October-December), driven by data” [http://computer.financialexpress.com/columns/india-high-on-3g/9462/]

The company’s India unit grew by 15%, going past its counterparts during the quarter ending December as customers used its data services. [http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2015-02-06/news/58878696_1_organic-service-revenue-vittorio-colao-vodafone-india]

The above comments suggest that data services are being used more and are on rise. So, NO! the traditional revenue streams are being compensated by the newer revenue streams.

The telecos have to invent a business model to offer better services and not sabotage the foundation of principles of Internet.

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.

That is dumb. Imagine me as a company paying Airtel, Vodafone, Reliance to allow their users to use my product or service, when I am already paying for the infrastructure and bandwidth that is being used by the service to be delivered across the Internet. My users are paying me for using my services and are also paying telecos for infrastructure they are using. Why should there be any differential or preferential pricing or any differentiation provided based on service or product or even the teleco.

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.

Are you talking for protecting the founding principles of Internet or are you in bed with the telecos? Coz, the intent of this question doesnt even seem you are understanding the issue.

Let me put a simple example in perspective.

Imagine a situation where there is no traditional telephone communcation and our country has reached a point where all communication is taking place through VOIP.

A pregnant woman in a village needs medical help for her medical emergency and when she tries to call the local government hospital for emergency care, the leeching telecom service provider like Reliance, Airtel , Vodafone would put a automated response saying, medical emergencies are being routed to state of the art Kokilaben hospital in Mumbai, Delhi, or whatever place it would be.

DO YOU FUCKING IMAGINE WHAT YOU ARE SIGNING UP FOR?

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.

So, you are saying security concerns are being addressed by having differential pricing and allowing telecos to govern what should be allowed and what should not?

The Government of India has every right to protect the nation's interest and block sites or services if they feel they are against national interest or are threatening national security.

But it has to be justified based on evidence, and not whims and fancies of few corporate interests.

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.

They should simply refer such cases to the IPC (Indian Penal Code) and not act as moral policeman like ShivSena and MNS in protecting the security. And by simply offering better infrastructure, they would further the interests of consumers and NOT by crying in front of you(TRAI) to twist regulations.

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.

ETNO is similar to India’s COAI which makes it an industry lobby group. Understandably, the suggestions made by ETNO heavily favor the telecom companies and will be detrimental to customers if India refers to their suggestions.

ETNO’s stand have been widely criticized in the past. Europe’s own group of government regulators [Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communication (BEREC)]

http://berec.europa.eu/files/document_register_store/2012/11/BoR_%2812%29_120_BEREC_on_ITR.pdf ETNO’s proposals could jeopardize the “continued development of the open, dynamic and global platform that the Internet provides” which will “lead to an overall loss of welfare”. Additionally, the international free expression group Article 19 says ETNO’s proposal “would seriously undermine net neutrality.

According to Access Now, ETNO’s recommendations would have meant higher data charges for customers while from an entrepreneur’s standpoint, it will limit their ability to reach out to a wider market. For a small but fast growing startup and digital media sector in India, this can potentially ring the death knell. ETNO’s suggestions on this subject so far have failed to have been accepted by any government agency - including the regulators in their own host countries. It is therefore especially troubling that TRAI is choosing to make one of their proposals a pillar of this public consultation here in India.

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.

Net Neutrality, by definition, means no discrimination of traffic flowing on the internet with respect to speed, access and price. Chile and Brazil, which are developing countries just like India, have passed laws supporting net neutrality. This is in addition to government commitments to implement net neutrality legislation in the United States and European Union.

NO DISCRIMINATION, NO PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT.

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.

As argued above NO DISCRIMINATION, NO PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT. It is stupid and almost suicidal to imagine discrimination as normal.

Imagine having reservation for voice traffic for people from backward classes and donation quota preference for people from rich and creamy layer. Ridiculous isnt it? The question is equally one.

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?

As long as traffic management techniques are adopted to manage traffic and not manipulate the traffic, TSPs should continue and even improve those. But that is not what will contribute for fairness and transparency.

It is their business to manage the traffic and they should do their business in correct manner. If there are instances where they have manipulated the traffic to test the waters in our country, then you wake up and punish them.

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

TSPs should upgrade the network. It is the shittiest in the world and they are charging a bomb for it already. So, they should manage their resources and improve and not charge additionally the service providers or the users for their mismanagement and miscalculations.

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.

 NO DISCRIMINATION, NO PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT. These two things should be adopted to ensure transparency to consumers. You are simply twisting the questions just like we engineers do in college vivas to fool the external examiners. But you know what, the external examiner is not a fool.

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.

NO! The tarrif charges by the companies are supposed to be decided by the companies providing services to us. Why are you in the middle playing for them?

If I dont like using Reliance for their stupid services and at the price they are charging, I'll move on to someone else. They need not have regulation.

They need to upgrade their existing shitty infrastructure.

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.

Who is the stakeholder here? In telecom services there are two stakeholders. 

1. We are users of telecom services

2. The telecom service providers themselves.

Why should OTT service players even appear in the picture. Having any idiotic frameworks like BuTS would cripple the innovation.

Best examples of ways to cripple progress today and which are live in the world are G20, G8, G4, United Nations, WTO, GATT. Stop screwing further.

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

India specific OTT apps should find their own ways to reach to the end users. They should not do by crying in front of the telecom providers for providing their content to their preferential users.

Imagine every time I open my browser, instead of going to Google.com, if I am shoved on my face an Airtel landing page with option to only search from an Indian search engine that doesnt get my job done.

It is the same example as Reliance pushing Kokilaben hospital services when I need access to nearby government hospital service.

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.

Arey, you are again asking the above question by twisting it. Idiot! There should not be any such framework for any services.

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

That is an issue between me the user and the service provider

Like for Telecommunication Service , there are two stakeholders

1. Me (telecom user)

2. Telecom service provider

Similarly

For any app/service/product I use there are two stakeholders

1. Me(The app user)

2. The App/Product Service provider itself.

The telecom service provider is not the app/product/service provider. This distinction is very important for you to know. And the telecom service provider even if he has a competing app/product/service, he has no right to give preferential treatment to his app/product/service.

Given an apple and orange, it is upto ME to choose what to pay for and what to leave, not have Telecom service provider to make or assist in my choice making.

It would be like advertising in today's world.

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

If non-communication OTT players choose to offer communication services, would you start charging them differently? All communication and non-communication service providers are data. 

There should be NO DISCRIMINATION, NO PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT for data. Isnt that plain and simple?

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

Yes, the entire foundation principles of Internet in this country are threatened.

Media in this country is compromised. Food, Agriculture, Water usage in our country has been monopolized and compromised. Even our politicians are compromised. Internet is one of the last frontiers that should under no circumstances be compromised.

Thanks and Sincere Regards

Ravi Madhukar Balgi

09869235556