TRAI Supports Net Neutrality, Says No To Facebook's Free Basics

The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) on Monday ruled against differential pricing for Internet services, in a major setback to Facebook Inc’s plan to roll out free Internet to the masses in Asia’s third-largest economy. It ruled that no service provider shall offer or charge discriminatory tariffs for data services offered based on content.

The TRAI added that a service provider may reduce tariff for providing emergency services or at times of any grave emergency. It remarked the same has to be reported to authority within seven working days. The TRAI says it will order service providers to withdraw such tariff and will penalise the service provider with Rs 50,000 for each day of contravention.

For those uninitiated, it began with TRAI floating a consultation paper seeking views if differential pricing should be allowed, amidst the whole net neutrality debate. The regulator wanted to know what steps should be taken to ensure principles of non-discrimination, affordable Internet access, competition and so on if differential pricing is allowed. After some media coverage connecting differential pricing to net neutrality, Trai quickly put out a statement saying the paper issued is not on net neutrality, but on a specific matter about differential pricing.

However, there is no denying that both are co-related. Now, differential pricing means, different prices for different content aka apps, which violates net neutrality. So, differential pricing and net neutrality go hand-in-hand. And, we can say the same about Free Basics or any other similar platform. Differential pricing won’t just change the way we’ve always used Internet, but blatantly unfair and discriminating.The paper floated by TRAI received 24 lakh responses.

Points to be noted :

• No service provider can offer or charge discriminatory tariffs for data services on the basis of content.
• No service provider shall enter into any arrangement, agreement or contract, by whatever name called, with any person, natural or legal, that the effect of discriminatory tariffs for data services being offered or charged by the service provider for the purpose of evading the prohibition in this regulation.
• Reduced tariff for accessing or providing emergency services, or at times of public emergency has been permitted.
• Financial disincentives for contravention of the regulation have also been specified
• TRAI may review these regulations after a period of two years.

Complete TRAI report can be read here.

Should I support Facebook's Free Basics in India?

Do you have any idea why 'Internet.org' was renamed to 'Free Basics' just for India?

About 1 year ago, when Internet.org was launched in India, many citizens protested and stopped it as it was against the net neutrality. Facebook was shocked by this response. So, the marketing department of Facebook renamed it to 'FREE BASICS' and relaunched as they thought Indians will never say 'no' to anything which is given for free.

Now, Facebook is aggressively marketing to get it accepted by India's Telecom regulator.  They are publishing full page newspaper ads, roadside banners and online ads. They stooped so low from their standards and started sending constant notifications to all their Indian Users to click a button which will send a mail to TRAI saying that you support 'Free basics'. They even 'accidentally' sent these notification to foreign users.

They make their ads look like they are doing a favour for India through 'Free basics' and our evil government is stopping their good efforts. And, if you do not accept their nagging notifications, then they make it look like you are a bad person who doe'n't support 'digital equality' showing the list of your friends who support it.

'Digital equality'- another term coined by Facebook for their ads. Does that word look suspiciously similar to 'Net neutrality'? Aye?

What is 'Free basics'/'Internet dot org' according to Facebook?

Free Basics by Facebook provides free access to basic internet services to a billion people all over the world.

Free Basics makes the internet accessible to more people by providing them access to a range of free basic services like news, maternal health, travel, local jobs, sports, communication, and local government information.

To date, we've been able to offer these services to a billion people across Asia, Africa and Latin America. By introducing people to the benefits of the internet through these services, we hope to bring more people online and help improve their lives.

That really really makes it look so world challengingly good, right? Who doesn't want free unlimited internet?

You can imagine that a poor kid in a Chhatisgarh village in central India should be able to see Khan Academy videos, her Dad should be able to look up agricultural spot prices on Google or a commodity exchange and perhaps her Mom could look for a better-paying job at a top job board. But natch, none of these are part of the so-called "Internet/Free Basics" that Facebook offers the poor. Videos in fact, are not available at all, presumably to conserve bandwidth so it can be retained for more important things like villagers sending each other Candy Crush requests.

There is no Google, there is no LinkedIn, there's no Alibaba, there's no Amazon, there's no Flipkart, there's no eBay. No place these folks can buy, or sell or trade. There's no Kiva or other bottom-of-pyramid money service. No loans they can receive. No government sites, no banks. No Coursera or EdX or Khan Academy - so it's not about education either. Forget about entertainment - there's absolutely none of that. And no Quora, of course. You name any possible site of importance to someone who needs information and opportunities, and it's not there. But, hey, I guess then you can always poke folks in the next village! (source)

What is 'free basics'  according to rest of us?

Free basics give free internet access to Facebook and few other internet services approved by Facebook.

The internet market growth is getting saturated in the western world as most people are already using internet. India and other Asian countries have a large untapped population who are yet to use internet. Facebook wants to acquire these users by any means possible. One easy way to make Facebook popular among these users is to give it for free.

Do you know how drug-agents get college students addicted to their drugs? They first give it for completely free. Then once the students get addicted to it, they start charging them heftily.

Free basics is launched for Facebook's best interests. Otherwise why are they so pushy about this and investing millions for the ad campaign itself, when people are clearly protesting against it? Reliance - the official network partner of Free basics advertises it as 'Free Facebook' on newspapers (source)

What are 'basics'?

Facebook or Whatsapp wasn't a basic internet service 10 years ago. If some other company X had offered their service free from past 15 years then facebook/whatsapp wouldn't have even existed.

The things which may look basic now may not be basic in next 10 years. By giving Facebook control of which apps to give for free, we are creating a monopoly. New startups won't be able to compete as everyone will use the Facebook's free alternative.

For example:- If free basics was launched in 2010, then Whatsapp would never have been so popular as 'Facebook Messenger' would have been free, while you would have to pay data charges to use 'Whatsapp' or any other service. This creates a monopolistic environment where only Facebook will thrive.

What is Net neutrality?

Net Neutrality is the principle that Internet service providers and governments should treat all data on the Internet the same, not discriminating or charging differentially by user, content, site, platform, application, type of attached equipment, or mode of communication.

It is one of the fundamental principle due to which Internet exists in the form we see today.

"What net neutrality activists won't tell you?" - Seriously? This is the title they used in their newspaper ads.

The guys behind Save The Internet!  have given a befitting reply.

You can read the reply here:- 

• There are other successful models (this, this, this) for providing free Internet access to people, without giving a competitive advantage to Facebook. Free Basics is the worst of our options.
• Facebook doesn’t pay for Free Basics, telecom operators do. Where do they make money from? From users who pay. By encouraging people to choose Free Basics, Facebook reduces the propensity to bring down data costs for paid Internet access.
• Free Basics isn’t about bringing people online. It’s about keeping Facebook and its partners free, while everything else remains paid. Users who pay for Internet access can still access Free Basics for free, giving Facebook and its partners an advantage. Free Basics is a violation of Net Neutrality
• Internet access is growing rapidly in India. We’ve added 100 million users in 2015. Almost all the connections added in India in the last 1 year are NOT because of Free Basics.
• Free Basics is not an open platform. Facebook defines the technical guidelines for Free Basics, and reserves the right to change them. They reserve the right to reject applicants, who are forced to comply with Facebook’s terms. In contrast they support ‘permissionless innovation’ in the US.
• The only source of info on Facebook’s Free Basics is Facebook, and it misleads people. Facebook was criticised in Brazil for misleading advertising (source). Their communication in India is misleading. People find the “Free” part of Free Basics advertising from Facebook (or FreeNet free Internet) from Reliance misleading (source).
• Facebook gets access to all the usage data and usage patterns of all the sites on Free Basics. No website which wants to compete with Facebook will partner with them because it will have to give them user data. Facebook gives data to the NSA (source) and this is a security issue for India.
• Research has shown that people prefer to use the open web for a shorter duration over a limited set of sites for a longer duration. (source)
• Facebook says that Free Basics doesn’t have ads, but does not say that it will never have ads on Free Basics.
• Facebook has shown people as saying that they support Free Basics when they haven’t. They may claim 3.2 million in support, but how many of those mails are legitimate?

Facebook shares 10 key facts about Free Basics. Here's what's wrong with all 10 of them

What can Facebook actually do without violating net neutrality?

• Facebook can give all Indian users free full access to internet up to certain data limit every month.(For example: 100MB internet free for everyone every month without any restrictions. Facebook can pay for that as part of their philanthropic effort.)
• Free internet at low speeds up to certain data limit
• Ad supported free internet, but with no restrictions on which site/app you can visit and which you can't.
• Give subsidized data coupons like Rs10 for first 200MB of the month.
• Lay the infrastructure(cables, routers etc) to connect villages/rural towns.
• Give free unrestricted internet to poor people in selected regions.
• They can create something like 'GoogleWebLight For Slow Internet' which will reduce the data size of all websites and provide it for free.
• Mozilla in partnership with Grameenphone in Bangladesh allows users to receive 20 MB of data usage for free each day, in exchange for viewing an advertisement.
• Aircel is going to give free unrestricted internet at the speed of 64kbps across the country.

What can you do to stop 'Free basics'?

You can go to Save The Internet! and sent an email to TRAI saying you are against this. TRAI have already put a ban on 'free basics' till 31st Dec and is asking user's input.

You can spread this information and ask your friends to also do the same.

They have made it very difficult to write convincing articles against it, as the writer would end up looking like a jerk/elitist if they say "I am against free basics for the poor". This is why it is important for the people who know the truth to help others understand it. Is it possible to stand against a multi million dollar advertising campaign containing the word 'free' by a company which already has direct access to most internet users?

Microsoft, Paytm and Truecaller have strongly opposed 'Free basics '-(Source)

Mahesh Murthy (co-founder Seedfund) opposes 'Free basics' in his LinkedIn article.

Tim Berners-Lee (Inventor of the World Wide Web) opposes 'Free basics' (Source)

PS : I don't own this post. I was going through Quora, I came across this post and thought its worth sharing. For the original post please click here.

Government Extends Deadline for Comments on Net Neutrality

Stakeholders awaiting the government's guidelines on net neutrality may have to wait longer as some more time has now been given to the people and institutions to give their opinion on the recommendations of an official panel on this subject.

"Last date for submission of suggestions and comments on report of committee on net neutrality through the discussion forum under www.MyGov.in has been extended till August 20," an official communique posted on the website of the communications ministry said.

The report, submitted by a panel headed by technocrat A.K. Bhargava, was made public on July 16, and said it favoured, among a host of other matters, an end to the free-call regime over the Internet. This had evoked strong resentment among the netizens.

Still an evolving concept, net neutrality calls upon government, Internet service providers and other stakeholders to treat all voice and data services on the Internet equally, and not levy differential tariffs for usage, content, platform, sites, application or mode of communication.

Reacting to the protests over the panel recommendations, Communications and IT Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad had told parliament soon after that these were only suggestions and not the final view. "It is neither the final report, nor has the government taken any final view," he said.

"Based on the committee report, comments and suggestions received and recommendations of Telecom Regulatory Authority of India, the government will take a considered decision on various aspects of net neutrality, in the best interest of the country."

In a set of recommendations that could have ended the free regime for domestic calls made through Internet messenger services such as WhatsApp, Viber and Skype, the official panel has suggested that they be treated like regular telecom service providers for tariff and regulation. But it wanted messaging free of tariff.

Save The Internet, Tell TRAI We Need Network Neutrality

[ Image : The Logical Indian ]

It's a crucial time for net neutrality in India. The Indian telecom regulator, Trai, has published a consultation paper for framing regulations on 'over-the-top' (OTT) services or simply, value added third party internet-based services such as WhatsApp, Skype, Facebook and Viber, among others.

The body has called for comments from all stakeholders (internet users, internet service providers, telcos, industry bodies among others) so that it can make a decision on subjecting internet services to an additional licensing fee and whether these providers should pay telcos for using their internet pipes.

Trai has also asked for views on net neutrality in the Indian context. Net neutrality implies that all websites and services should be treated equal and there should be no discrimination in terms of speed and cost of access. This means that a telco can't block a certain website (because of commercial or other interests) or promote one service over the other. It also means that an internet provider or telco cannot throttle speeds for one service or charge extra. Indian mobile operators say that they have made big infrastructure investments in creating networks and OTT players are getting a free run.

If you don't want your mobile operator to charge extra for WhatsApp, Skype or YouTube and promote its own services over the others, submit your responses to TRAI's twenty questions to the TRAI before April 24, 2015 at advqos@trai.gov.in.

Please sign this petition - click here

Just signing the petition will not help us, we need to send mails to TRAI giving our response (along with justifications) to those 20 questions asked by them. I had already listed out 20 questions that were asked by TRAI. Please have a look at those questions and do send them emails. Click here to view a sample doc containing answers for those 20 questions.

You can even visit www.savetheinternet.in or www.netneutrality.in and send your response either by editing the answers or by directly hitting the send your response button.

The deadline for submission is 24th April 2015

What You Should Do Before April 24th, 2015 to Save Internet in India

It's a crucial time for net neutrality in India. The Indian telecom regulator, Trai, has published a consultation paper for framing regulations on 'over-the-top' (OTT) services or simply, value added third party internet-based services such as WhatsApp, Skype, Facebook and Viber, among others.

The body has called for comments from all stakeholders (internet users, internet service providers, telcos, industry bodies among others) so that it can make a decision on subjecting internet services to an additional licensing fee and whether these providers should pay telcos for using their internet pipes.

Trai has also asked for views on net neutrality in the Indian context. Net neutrality implies that all websites and services should be treated equal and there should be no discrimination in terms of speed and cost of access. This means that a telco can't block a certain website (because of commercial or other interests) or promote one service over the other. It also means that an internet provider or telco cannot throttle speeds for one service or charge extra. Indian mobile operators say that they have made big infrastructure investments in creating networks and OTT players are getting a free run.

If you don't want your mobile operator to charge extra for WhatsApp, Skype or YouTube and promote its own services over the others, submit your responses to TRAI's twenty questions to the TRAI before April 24, 2015 at advqos@trai.gov.in.

Please sign this petition - click here

TRAI seeks responses to the following twenty questions:

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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

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

Just signing the petition will not help us, we need to send mails to TRAI giving our response (along with justifications) for these 20 questions asked by them. click here to see the sample doc containing answers for those 20 questions.

Prior to the introduction of the paper, we've already seen one telecom operator, Airtel, announce differential data pricing for voice calls made through the internet. This meant that users would have paid more for consuming mobile data if they used services like Skype, Viber and Line. This was almost like penalising them to not use the company's network for calls.

Although, Airtel rolled back the tariff hike after facing flak from its users on social media platforms, it claimed that the decision was taken after it got to know about the TRAI coming up with a paper on OTT services and that it was ready for a 'balanced outcome.'

If you don't fight for net neutrality, this is what the internet could become. #BoycottAirtel #NetNeutralityIndia pic.twitter.com/CA4n7qcpxW
— Deepak Kanakaraju (@digitaldpak) January 9, 2015

Source