11:06 The Hindu: Hi everyone, welcome to The Hindu's live chat.
11:09 The Hindu: We have with us our Business and Tech Editor Sriram Srinivasan,
Pranesh Prakash from CIS India and Yuthika Bharghava, our Correspondent who is following this issue.
11:12 Sriram Srinivasan: Hi, this is Sriram. And I shall start off with a broad question to Pranesh Prakash on what he sees as the most important takeaways from the Department of Telecommunications panel report
11:13 Pranesh Prakash: First off, it must be noted that the job of the panel was to analyse various submissions before it, and synthesise them to whatever extent possible.
11:14 Pranesh Prakash: The panel has come out swinging strongly in favour of Net neutrality. It keeps reiterating that the "core principles of Net neutrality" should be adhered to.
11:15 Sriram Srinivasan: For the readers, here's a brief intro for the reason we are here: the DoT a few days back released its report on the issues of Net neutrality, an issue which has been in the limelight in India over the last six months.
11:16 Pranesh Prakash: On the issue of licensing, which is a related but independent question, the panel has clearly said: No licensing of "OTT application services", but "OTT communication services" may be licensed to bring them on an equal regulatory footing with other non-OTT communication services.
11:17 Pranesh Prakash: In short, that means that VoIP services like WhatsApp and Viber may be licensed. However, this IS A DIFFERENT issue from "Net neutrality".
11:18 Pranesh Prakash: Net neutrality is about regulating what ISPs can and cannot do. This recommendation does not provide ISPs the liberty to charge extra for WhatsApp.
11:18 Sriram Srinivasan: Are these issues getting mixed up somewhere, Pranesh?
11:19 Pranesh Prakash: Instead, it says that WhatsApp calls (and not WhatsApp messages) need to be licensed. This is a bad idea. Even if we need a regulatory framework (and we may), it SHOULD NOT be a licensing framework (meaning: the companies shouldn't need to take permission from the government to operate).
11:20 Pranesh Prakash: But this IS NOT a violation of Net neutrality. If this is a violation of Net neutrality, then even the data protection framework that the EU has, which requires WhatsApp and Viber to abide by data protection laws, is a violation of Net neutrality. That's a ridiculous assertion.
11:20 Pranesh Prakash: Yes, Sriram, they are getting mixed up.
11:21 Sriram Srinivasan: At this point, I would like to bring in Yuthika, our correspondent who has been closely tracking the story, to the conversation.
11:21 Pranesh Prakash: Further, the panel has NOT recommended charging for WhatsApp calls. They've simply pointed out that current telecom players have to abide by regulations such as DND (do not disturb), etc., and WhatsApp doesn't. This creates a non-level playing field.
11:22 Yuthika: Hi Pranesh, Sriram.
11:23 Pranesh Prakash: The panel has NOT given a nod for Airtel Zero. If you read para 12.6, nowhere does it give a nod for Airtel Zero. If Airtel Zero is anti-competitive, under the recommendations of the panel, it will NOT be allowed.
11:23 Comment From Ashok How can the panel nod for airtel zero while reject internet.org, both seems to be pretty similar ?
11:23 Comment From nishant i heard that calling over voip will be charged. But please note that calling consumes data which we pay for every kilobytes. Then why double charges?
Reply:
Pranesh Prakash: The panel does not say that VoIP will or should be charged. They simply say that the regulatory difference between WhatsApp calls and normal calls has to be bridged. That may, or may not, lead to an increase in price. But I haven't seen a single comment from WhatsApp or Viber saying it will lead to an increase in price.
11:23 Pranesh Prakash: People who say that the panel has given a nod to Airtel Zero have either not read the report or are deliberately misleading others.
11:23 Sriram Srinivasan: Hi Yuthika, can you throw light on the reactions to the report and what you have been hearing from the department side?
11:23 Comment From Sid How are the authorities going to know if i am making an international VOIP call? I guess they will track the IP. Need some insight.
Reply:
Pranesh Prakash: Even if they track the IP, a domestic call could simply be routed through an international server. So their idea of distinguishing between international and domestic VoIP calls is an infeasible one, which cannot be implemented. It is a recommendation they haven't thought through, and one that should not be accepted by the govt.
11:24 Comment From Ankur there must be a stand from TRAI ie must be fair enough
11:25 Yuthika: Yes Sriram, the committee is very clear that they do not support/endorse any tariff plan. Not even Airtel Zero.
11:25 Sriram Srinivasan: To sum up, Pranesh is making very important points: 1. It has not recommended charging for Whatsapp calls. 2. There has been no nod for Airtel Zero
11:26 Comment From Guest will net-neutrality help us in anyway to lead a peaceful life?
Reply:
Pranesh Prakash: Haha. My life will be much more peaceful once this brouhaha is over ;-)
11:26 Comment From Sam DO we have such approach to OTTs worldwide ?
Pranesh Prakash: Yes and no. OTT communication services are regulated in different countries. For instance, in the US, Vonage is required to provide emergency services: http://www.ictregulationtoo... But I don't know of countries where a licensing regime exists (as opposed to ex-post regulation). It's a bad idea.
11:26 Yuthika: The department can regulate service providers such as Airtel and hence have recommended that any tariff by them needs to be tested against the principles of net neutrality by the regulator TRAI. However, since Facebook cannot be regulated by TRAI, they have singled it out in the report
11:27 Comment From Ankur Transparent policy should be follow by the TRAI.
11:27 Comment From Udit Here is the DOT report. i feel let down: >http://www.dot.gov.in/sites/default/files/u68/Net_Neutrality_Committee_report.pdf
11:29 Comment From Abhishek Do you think charging these services will give space to new service
Reply:
Yuthika: Abhishek, there is no clarity on charges as of now. And if at all, it would be levied only of domestic internet telephony. The panel has clearly recommended that all other services should not be touched.
11:29 Comment From Udit Read only the chpt. 17 summary of recommendations.
11:30 Comment From Sid Mr. Pranesh, Net Neutrality is keeping the Internet free. The Internet was never designed to be regulated. I don't understand why in India we tend to regulate everything and license everything, for the sake of making money. I am not even getting to the state of regulation in the Indian Telecom industry.
Reply:
Pranesh Prakash: Net neutrality is not about non-regulation of the Internet. Net neutrality is about regulation of ISPs. If we don't impose regulation, we can't have Net neutrality since ISPs will do as they please. Please think your comments through.
11:31 Sriram Srinivasan: Pranesh, some like Rajeev Chandrasekhar have called the report vague. Would you subscribe to that view?
Reply:
Pranesh Prakash: It is not meant to provide regulatory language, so yes, to that extent it is vague: but I believe it is so by design.
11:34 Comment From Nelson OJ While you say it is not a violation of net neutrality don't you think the consumers are getting charged for internet and a service that runs on the internet is a double charge.
Reply:
Pranesh Prakash: 1. There is no indication that WhatsApp will now be charged. 2. You pay for access to the Wall Street Journal online. You also pay for Internet access. It is not a "double charge". 3. If you want free access to WhatsApp, you might wish to support zero-rating. But I'm guessing you don't want that either. People are hard to please.
11:34 Comment From ridhima Why has all authorities turned all scavengers who are not happy with people existing peacefully with technologies
Reply:
Yuthika: Ridhima, the panel's view is that from a public policy point of view there can not be two rules for the same service. Hence, the move to recommend some regulatory overview for OTT communication services.
11:34 Comment From Sri ISP's should not be allowed to control what data gets priority..
Reply:
Pranesh Prakash: That is not how the Internet works: Please see this >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_of_service So even if we have that as a rule, we must have sane exceptions.
11:34 Comment From Vignesh Bad for the ppl and the Telecom company's only will gain.
11:34 Comment From Phani I think different players providing the same service (Calls & Messages) should exist in the market but the regulatory mechanism should ensure there is a level playing field, checking the unfair competition etc. After all when the consumer is getting a good deal out of these services, I see no reason to prohibit them. Just ensure there is room for everyone with adequate safeguards.
11:35 Comment From Nelson OJ The internet is bound to become the main communications channel. the issue here is that telecom companies have invested massive amounts of money for the current technology and are trying to protect their investments.
11:36 Comment From Guest Same PM who used social media as primary object to reach out to public, why is he blocking them now..
11:37 Sriram Srinivasan: Yuthika, can you take us through how OTT messaging services could now be thinking through?
11:38 Comment From pradeep it seems we are going back to licence Raj system.
11:38 Comment From SinghSahab when we are already paying around 250 for 1gb internet then there is no point of purchasing diff packs for these services like whatsapp etc..
Reply:
Pranesh Prakash: I agree. That is not being recommended by the panel.
11:40 Comment From pradeep can you tell me which all countries in the world have Net-neutrality regulation?
11:41 Comment From Sourabh What is net neutrality meaning first tell me.
Reply:
The Hindu: A look at what net neutrality is and how it affects users - thne.ws/1Grg4ML
11:41 Comment From Guest Also, there is the challenge of permitting the ISP to make a call on the "value" of traffic, and whether to monetize it or not. How is that fair? ISPs cannot be allowed to determine whether or not a call, a messaging service or a social media platform is likely to make money or not. ISPs are infrastructure providers, after all, and they have to learn to operate within market realities.
Reply:
Pranesh Prakash: Absolutely! All forms of negative discrimination against any traffic should be prohibited, barring exceptions for reasonable network management.
11:42 Yuthika: Sriram, there is no final regulation yet for them to think it through. The recommended regulations clearly say that OTT messaging services should be kept out of the ambit of any kind of regulatory oversight. However, in most cases, like in case of whatsapp and Line, messaging services have evolved to offer internet telephony too. So, we really have to wait and see what kind of licensing is suggested.
11:42 Comment From sai i feel, after net neutrality , there is no pint of using 3g & 4g services in india.
11:43 Sriram Srinivasan: Pranesh, on the issue of zero rating, given what the panel has come out with, would you think a service that gives free data to consumers (like the Boston-based Jana, which gives free data for users who watch a commercial) could be considered valid?
Reply:
Pranesh Prakash: I have a piece on what zero-rating I believe *should* be valid: >http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/regulatory-perspectives-on-net-neutrality#h.yd0ptbr561l8
Pranesh Prakash: I believe Jana will be allowed through while Airtel Zero probably won't unless Airtel changes the scheme to not be anti-competitive.
11:44 Comment From nishant yuthika: "the panel's view is that from a public policy point of view there can not be two rules for the same service. Hence, the move to recommend some regulatory overview for OTT communication services." ... I agree. However the other OTT services are not double charged. Its not that I pay some huge amount to keep my mobile connection and then get charged for calls i do. However, in VOIP we are already paying for data, if data is made available for free then charging for OTT services is understandable. Otherwise its just proposterous
Reply:
Pranesh Prakash: You *are* being double charged for non-OTT communications, but you just don't realize it. One charge is for the network layer (the spectrum cost, etc., which are built into your call cost), and one charge is for the service provision (non-infrastructure marginal cost of each call). Since both of these are added together, you don't realize they are two separate charges.
11:44 Comment From Ashok Nobody is trying to mislead people here. I read about in Hindu. I cant find it right now. I have about the charges "According to one of its recommendations, domestic calls made on these internet-based applications should be charged" source: >https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/chennai/whats-up-with-whatsapp-calls/article7436143.ece Sriram and Pranesh: You guys are saying opposite.
Pranesh Prakash: The Hindu report is wrong. Please read recommendations 6-11 on page 86 of the report, and judge for yourself: >http://www.dot.gov.in/sites/default/files/u68/Net_Neutrality_Committee_report.pdf
11:44 Comment From Guest What I really don't get it that from a pure economics perspective, the ISP's, by charging for the service, are creating a disincentive for the development and operation of applications and 3rd party services. Even if they were to allow a 3rd party to absorb these charges (like Flipkart or Facebook has been proposing to do), the model is really not sustainable in the long-term. But since we are talking monopolies or oligopolies -- the ones who will suffer in the end are end users, due to a lack of choice. Regulation should reflect this reality, no?
Reply:
Pranesh Prakash: Under this report ISPs WILL NOT be allowed to charge separately for VoIP calls, domestic or international, since that will violate Net neutrality. Could you quote me the para number from the report which indicates otherwise?
11:45 Comment From SinghSahab If i have bought net pack its my choice what i have to do with it whether whatsapp call skype calls etc or msgsing
11:45 Pranesh Prakash: Since many people have not actually read the report, but are going by misleading media reports, here's the link: >http://www.dot.gov.in/sites/default/files/u68/Net_Neutrality_Committee_report.pdf
11:46 Comment From SinghSahab and if you guyz are thinking that telecos are loosing something? really? 1gb pack was for 98 then goes to 125 now 177? and u think they r loosing something
11:47 Comment From ram thry r looting common ppl nothing else
11:47 Comment From Narayan Dankhara I think this is done by INTENSE lobbying by telcos.......
11:47 Comment From Mahimna Have they ever used the domestic calling from OTTs ..its not at all user friendly. The usual calling is only used for making STD calls. Yes video calling is frequently used but it uses the internet podium of the telecom operators. Have they ever looked into the revenue they generate from internet services, packages.
11:50 Sriram Srinivasan: Yuthika, how does the process now move? We need to wait for the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India to bring out its final report, right?
11:52 Comment From Narayan Dankhara Sriram Srinivasan Sir is right at-least we have to wait for final report..
11:52 Pranesh Prakash: People should remember that public policy demands that telecom companies succeed as does Net neutrality. Without telecom companies, we won't have any Internet infrastructure, which means that we can't have a Net, leave alone a neutral one.
11:52 Comment From Guest if eventually, whatsapp and other such services will be charged extra, will it be applicable only for mobile networks (G networks and Broadband provided by ISPs) or will it also be applicable for all sort of internet connections (like fiber channel connections provided by non-mobile companies like ACT, hathway) ?
11:52 Comment From Ram Let each state decide they own policy on Net neutrality should be delt same like FDI...
11:52 Comment From vipul net was never neutral. the telcos were paying for us. but now the profit has declined. so we are all by ourselves.
11:53 Comment From nishant @pranesh.. exactly. We are double charged. But the charges are so less that common public doesnt feel it. Recently, telecom companies have hiked rate of internet usage because somewhere they knew the future of services. How will this be regulated that public doesnt pay huge amount in that?
Reply:
Pranesh Prakash: Well, if we oppose *companies* paying for it (i.e., we oppose zero-rating), then the cost of the Internet for the consumer is bound to go up as the telecom companies expand into the hinterlands of India and incur greater capital expenditure costs.
11:54 Comment From Ran With the increasing population and a country like India have a 1.3+ billion population, we need to have good regulations in all these to protect everyones interests and sustainability. For example, a good regulation could bring down the use of using technologies unnecessarily (mainly used for entertainment all day). It will one side save energy and stop burning fuels and on another increases the countries productivity and stops distraction of people especially children and the youth and increase their efficiency which are need of the hour for the entire nation.
11:54 Pranesh Prakash: On a lighter note: People don't want free VoIP (zero-rating), but they don't want charged VoIP either. People are hard to please :-)
11:54 Sriram Srinivasan: Agree with Pranesh on how there has been miscommunication about this issue. So, here's the link to the DoT report: >http://www.dot.gov.in/sites/default/files/u68/Net_Neutrality_Committee_report.pdf
And here's the link to Pranesh's thoughts on zero-rating: >http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/regulatory-perspectives-on-net-neutrality#h.yd0ptbr561l8
11:54 Yuthika: As of now the government panel has invited suggestions and comments on its recommendations till August 15. Meanwhile, TRAI is also working on its report. But it won't be the final say in the matter. It will also be subject to public consultation and debates.
11:54 Comment From hilal Is it because so much money was spent on buying spectrem and the revenue streams are dying down because of people using alternate means of making calls. The mobile service companies have to come up with other options to make money. All they needed was convince a foolish Telcom minsister and there you, you on half the battle.
11:56 Comment From Akash there are two faces to this argument, one from the consumer point of view that there should be no discrimination for any kind of internet traffic and net neutrality should be there for all, on the other side from the point of view of ISPs they are incurring loses as previously sms service suffered as instant messaging apps came in the market and now voice call business is suffering as VOIP service is expanding its wings. I think govt should come up with a plan as to benefit both parties.
11:56 Comment From Ashis I think it is required at the moment becoz of the threat our country is facing from external sources
11:57 Pranesh Prakash: Please also note: I am NOT saying that WhatsApp will not start charging. They used to have a subscription fee: >https://www.whatsapp.com/faq/general/23014681 (USD 0.99 per year). WhatsApp might charge more, who knows. But licensing and charging extra are two separate issues. If the licence is free or very cheap (as ISP licences used to be in India), then what additional costs does WhatsApp incur?
11:59 Comment From Guest Yes, there should be net neutrality, isp's are misguiding its users right now which should be completely eradicated for the benefit of common people like us.
12:01 Comment From Guest If government plans to charge whatsapp calls, do they get charged even if I use them on wifi? Do they charge on 3g based wifi? is the government going to take money if whatsapp calls are charged per second?
12:02 Pranesh Prakash: Please have a look at what we at CIS submitted along with the IIM-Ahmedabad Idea Telecom COE: >http://trai.gov.in/comments/24-April/Attachments-49/Response%20-%20Regulation%20of%20OTTs.pdf
Reply:
Pranesh Prakash: In this we clearly say that we may need regulation for OTT communication services, but not licensing.
12:02 Comment From SMeher
This is an unfair and unwelcome initiative by TRAI. They should consider the public interest before implementing such initiatives.
12:02 Comment From nishant
@pranesh. Yeah thats tricky. I believe that if calls are going to be charged then internet prices should be reduced otherwise people will end up paying even more. yes, they do incur huge expenses for infrastructure which ranges in thousands of crore rupee. But in every business there is a break-even period. in telecom, this period is not very high. So, Will the company reduce the charges after that? (just curious)
Reply:
Pranesh Prakash: The telecom company will NOT be allowed to charge extra for WhatsApp, etc., under the DoT panel's recommendations.
12:03 Comment From Ravi Raman
Guys. please don't say that the profit has come down for Telecom companies.Now everybody has a cellphone and accessing net, whatsapp and making phonecalls like they have no work. Everybody is recharging almost every second day to buy minutes.all the telecom company offices are always full with lots of people and so do the other agent retail outlets. If they are following this way, where is the loss for the telecom companies. So they want more profit and so want to charge for everything. People should unite in this rather than giving to the telecom companies. If everybody stops using telephone for 1 hr, imagine how much loss these companies will have.
Pranesh Prakash: And if these companies have losses, you have not Internet. If you kill these companies, you'll be cutting off your nose to spite your face ;-)
12:05 Pranesh Prakash: Since people are getting confused about this, let me make it clear:
Telecom companies will NOT be allowed to charge extra for WhatsApp, etc., under the DoT panel's recommendations, regardless of whether it is domestic or international calls or messages. Please see recommendations 1 and 5 on page 85 of the report.
12:06 Sriram Srinivasan: I am afraid we have come to the end of the live chat. Thanks to Pranesh and Yuthika for making sense of the DoT report and what it means. Even as there is tremendous interest and informed debates on this issue in the country, there's also a lot of rabble rousing and misinformation. This chat did wonderfully well to clarify on some of the most important themes in the DoT report.
There are some links presented during the chat. Please do follow them.
12:07 Pranesh Prakash: You're welcome!
12:07 Yuthika: A lot of users have raised the issue of pricing. Like Pranesh pointed out Whatsapp used to have a subscription fee, that may or may not increase due to the licensing regime. We do not yet have any clarity on what kind of regime it might be. However, some officials at the department have said that increase might not be more that 6-7 paise per user.
Additionally, data rates in the country as presently very low. If Whatsapp continues to offer services that compete directly with what Airtel or Vodafone does, the telecom service providers have said they will have to increase data costs by six times.
12:07 Pranesh Prakash: Thanks for having me on. It was fun.
12:07 The Hindu: Thank you all for participating.
12:08 Yuthika: Licensing is just not about charges, but is also essential from security purpose as calls made from Whatsapp and similar services cant be traced or recorded.
12:08 The Hindu: Special thanks to Pranesh Prakash, Sriram Srinivasan and Yuthika Bharghava.
The protest against the stifling of the open nature of Internet is raging online and offline, and The Hindu has led from the front on the debate. Read our in-depth coverage of the issue, including editorials, explainers and online conversations.
Net neutrality
How does net neutrality affect you?
The internet is now a level-playing field. Anybody can start up a website, stream music or use social media with the same amount of data that they have purchased with a particular ISP. But in the absence of neutrality, your ISP might favour certain websites over others for which you might have to pay extra. Website A might load at a faster speed than Website B because your ISP has a deal with Website A that Website B cannot afford. It’s like your electricity company charging you extra for using the washing machine, television and microwave oven above and beyond what you are already paying.
Why now?
Sometime in March, TRAI released a draft consultation paper seeking views from the industry and the general public on the need for regulations for over-the-top (OTT) players such as Whatsapp, Skype, Viber etc, security concerns and net neutrality. The government panel on Net neutrality has now recommended that apps offering domestic calling be brought under the regulatory framework, but those providing messaging and international calling services over the Internet be kept free from licensing requirements.
What is an OTT?
OTT or over-the-top refers to applications and services which are accessible over the internet and ride on operators' networks offering internet access services. The best known examples of OTT are Skype, Viber, WhatsApp, e-commerce sites, Ola, Facebook messenger. The OTTs are not bound by any regulations. The Trai is of the view that the lack of regulations poses a threat to security and there’s a need for government’s intervention to ensure a level playing field in terms of regulatory compliance.
Comment
>Privileging telcos over netizens - Prabir Purkayastha The sort of closed Internet that TRAI is proposing, in defiance of the principle of net neutrality, is no longer on the discussion agenda in any country.
>Live Chat: The Hindu conducted a live chat on how net neutrality affects users. The panel included Pranesh Prakash from Centre for Internet and Society, Vijay Anand from The Start Up Centre and Sriram Srinivasan, The Hindu's Business Editor - Online.
Key players
- like Airtel, Vodaphone, Reliance...
- which lays down the rules for telecom companies
- The like Facebook, Google, whatsapp and other smaller startups
- You,
The Hindu Editorials
- > The importance of Net neutrality: Should the Internet be touched? That's one way to summarise the twenty questions the TRAI has asked the public in a recent consultation paper.
- > Blow for Net neutrality: Flipkart had to contain the fallout after Airtel Zero was severely criticised by the proponents of Net neutrality, the principle that all Internet traffic has to be treated equally.
>News analysis: Flipkart and flipside
Is Flipkart so naive not to know the implications of Airtel Zero for the overall Internet ecosystem?
>Here's why you're wrong, Mr. Zuckerberg
The Facebook founder said universal connectivity and net neutrality can co-exist.
>Here's all you need to know on the issue
Missed the debate? A look at the issue of Net neutrality and the controversy surrounding it.
>Telecom Ministry to submit report by May 9
The government has set up a six-member committee to examine the issue of Net neutrality.
