If you are one of India’s active netizens, it is unlikely that the
words Net Neutrality has escaped your daily dose of social media updates
and news. The debate, which gained pace on post AIB’s video on the topic
and news of the Airtel Zero programme, has seen some of the biggest
names in the Internet and media industries give their take on the issue.
More importantly, last month India’s telecom regulator TRAI came out
with a consultation paper on the growth of Over-the-top (OTT) players
like WhatsApp or Skype and is looking at exploring a regulatory
framework for these apps.
In essence, Net Neutrality implies that all Internet
data pack should be treated equally, that there should be no fast or
slow lanes for Internet, or that users should pay differently for
accessing some websites. While online activists and even big Internet
companies in India like ClearTrip, Flipkart, have come out to support Net Neutrality, the debate isn’t really as simple when it comes to India.
Also read: Cleartrip, media firms commit to Net Neutrality, pull out of Facebook’s Internet.org
For starters, in a country like India Net Neutrality has vast
implications, especially for start-ups, many of whom are dependent on
the medium for the success of their business. A neutral Internet means a
level playing field.
Rishabh Gupta, COO, Housing.com, says, “Net neutrality has played a
significant role in keeping the internet a level-playing field,
simplifying customer outreach for businesses across industries. Further,
the platform has encouraged new age entrepreneurs to bring in
innovative business models making technology as an integral part of
business; be it banking, mobile payments, e-commerce, real estate, etc.”
Manav Sethi, Group CMO, Askme adds that “any violation of Internet
Neutrality can have a serious bearing on effective and fair competition
in the market place”.
“We feel it is the government’s responsibility to ensure a level
playing field for home grown entrepreneurs and at the same time protect
the interests of netizens,” says Sethi.
Where licensing is concerned, Internet activists have also pointed
out that this just won’t work. Pranesh Prakash, Policy Director at
Centre for Internet and Society in India, says that India just can’t go
back to the licensing days.
“OTT players aren’t just your Facebook or Viber, it’s the entire
Internet. For instance with WebRTC protocol coming in you can do
peer-to-peer chat, video calls on Web browsers. How would TRAI propose
to regulate this, there’s no central service. It might not be popular
but it is being used by some already.”
VIDEO: AIB explains net neutrality with #SaveTheInternet video, and Bollywood retweets
He says the telecos’ argument about loss revenue due to rise of OTT’s
isn’t a legitimate one but adds that instead of going for more
regulation TRAI can look to reduce some differential regulations for
telecos to make things easier for them.
There’s also a growing belief that TRAI hasn’t acted fairly when it
comes to its paper on OTTs. The Internet and Mobile Association of India
(IAMAI) has slammed TRAI saying OTTs are already regulated and governed
by the IT Act.
A statement issued by IAMAI President Subho Ray said:
“It looks like TRAI, in its consultation paper, has copy-pasted from
submissions of telcos. India has a robust and at times, overbearing IT
Act.” Expressing support for Net Neutrality, his statement said, “the
paper makes an assumption that Internet doesn’t come under any
regulations, which is incorrect. All Internet companies are regulated by
IT Act”.
IAMAI includes firms like Google, Facebook, Snapdeal, Ola, MakeMyTrip and Saavn as its members.
But TRAI has also come out to defend its the whole debate. TRAI chief Rahul Khullar had earlier told Indian Express,
“There are passionate voices on both sides of the debate. And if that
was not enough, there’s a corporate war going on between a media house
and a telecom operator which is confounding already difficult matters.”
While TRAI’s paper has received criticism, it should be noted that
the paper does devote a significant proportion to discussing Net
Neutrality and the negative impact it could have if India overlooks the
principle.
The paper says,
“A policy decision to outright depart from “NN” (Net Neutrality) raises
various antitrust and public interest issues. There are concerns that
TSPs will discriminate against certain types of content and political
opinions. Such practices may hurt consumers and diminish innovation in
complementary sectors such as computer applications and content
dissemination. Discriminatory pricing proposals, if implemented, could
raise a variety of significant anti-competitive concerns.”
Discriminatory pricing proposals are what activists fear could take
place if India abandons its stand on Net Neutrality, and users will be
the one to suffer.
But there is counter-argument to the whole Net Neutrality debate. It
states that in a country like India many still don’t have access to data
or mobile Internet because it is expensive and that zero-ratings could
be a possible solution.
Zero ratings ensure that a TSP or ISP could declare a service or an
app as free, and usually these are services that the company has tied-up
with. The Facebook-Reliance initiative under the Internet.org
initiative is a Zero rating system, where the idea was to provide
certain services like Facebook, ClearTrip, NDTV, etc for free for users
in certain part of the country. A benevolent scheme no doubt, but a
violation of Net Neutrality all the same. Thanks to the furor over Net
Neutrality, ClearTrip and others have started pulling out of
Internet.org.
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has defended Internet.org saying while
network operators shouldn’t discriminate between services, “for people
who are not on the internet though, having some connectivity and some
ability to share is always much better than having no ability to connect
and share at all. That’s why programs like Internet.org are important
and can co-exist with net neutrality regulations.”
Zuckerberg isn’t the only one making an argument for Zero-rating apps. In a paper for Brookings Institute, Darrell M. West argues that zero-rating apps can actually help improve data access to those who can’t afford it.
As an example, the paper points out how “in Paraguay, an Internet.org
project has generated an increase in “the number of people using the
internet by 50% over the course of the partnership and [an] increase [in
the] daily data usage by more than 50%.” In addition to this the paper
says that, African nations have reported substantial upticks in Internet
usage following introduction of Facebook Zero.
Interestingly, some countries like Chile have banned Zero ratings
because they violate Net Neutrality. Pranesh Prakash says that the
argument given in favour of ‘zero ratings’ is a bogus one.
Prakash says, “Exclusive deals like Flipkart-Airtel, or Reliance or
Facebook or even free Wikipedia, end-up becoming anti-competitive.
Discriminatory deals should not be allowed or those that become
anti-competitive under Section 3 of Competition act should not be
allowed.”
“If zero-rating can exist in an environment of competition, only then it’s a good thing,” he adds.
But government stepping-in isn’t entirely unexpected. Sajai Singh,
Partner at J Sagar Associates Law Firm, points out that the government
has now woken up to a new disruptive technology. He gives an example of
cable television saying that when it first came up in India, the
government had no laws to deal with cable.
“This is another example of the government playing catch up and it
happens all across the world. It’ll happen more often with newer
disruptive technologies like robotics, artificial intelligence. For
instance, when the driverless car comes the government will have to
bring in some legislation,” he adds.
For now, TRAI has received over 7-8 lakh comments on the discussion paper that they had first put up on their site on 27 March.
It is fair to argue that Net Neutrality has helped preserve the
Internet’s free and open character in India and that a deviation from
the same will hurt users the most. Then there’s the very real picture
that India needs to provide Internet access to more of its citizens
especially those who can’t afford it. For TRAI, treading a fine line
between the two will prove to be a real challenge.