#SaveTheInternet #NetNeutrality: Rahul says India needs a law to protect Internet, Govt wants to divide Net among corporates
Rahul Gandhi today raised the issue of Net Neutrality in India in the
Lok Sabha. Rahul Gandhi said, Net Neutrality was a simple concept that
says that all citizens should get equal access to the Internet.
“But this government wants to divide the Internet and hand it over to a few big companies. India needs a Net Neutrality law that won’t allow the Internet to be divided into parts,” said Gandhi.
After Rahul Gandhi’s statement, Union Minister holding Ministry of Communications and Information Technology Ravi Shankar Prasad, said that the government of India was committed to Net Neutrality. He also denied that the government was under pressure from any company.
It was earlier reported that Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi had sought suspension of Question Hour in Lok Sabha and gave a notice for an adjournment motion to discuss the matter of Net Neutrality immediately.
An adjournment motion involves an element of censure against the Government.
A strong plea was made yesterday in the Lower House for ensuring net neutrality with demands that the recent consultation paper brought out by TRAI should be scrapped and attempts by certain telecom and internet service providers be scuttled.
Raising the issue during Zero Hour, M B Rajesh (CPI-M) had alleged that the consultation paper brought out by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India was “blatantly supporting” assault on net neutrality by telecom and internet service providers.
New Delhi | April 23, 2015 7:04 am
'Youth have voted and are asking on Twitter, on Facebook and on all other applications for #NetNeutrality ,' Rahul Gandhi said. Govt wants to divide Net among corporates: Rahul Gandhi
Congress Vice President Rahul Gandhi
Having attacked the government over the farm crisis two earlier,
Rahul Gandhi Wednesday targeted it over Net neutrality, the subject of a
campaign that has been online nationwide. Rahul demanded in the Lok
Sabha that the ongoing TRAI consultation on the subject be stopped and a
law be passed to ensure Net neutrality for all. This forced the
government to clarify that it had not yet taken any decision and that it
favoured “Internet for all”.
Rahul in the morning gave a notice for suspension of Question Hour to take up an adjournment motion, then raised the issue in zero hour and accused the government of “dividing the Internet among big corporates”.
“There are discussions on issues like NREGA, Right to Food, but I want to say Net neutrality, in simple terms, means the right to Internet. Every youth must have the right to Internet,” he said. “The government wants to divide the Internet among big industrialists.”
Making a reference to the social media campaign for Net neutrality, Rahul said one million people have registered to fight for it. “Youth have voted and are asking on Twitter, on Facebook and on all other applications for Net neutrality,” he said.
While Parliamentary Affairs Minister Venkaiah Naidu objected to the speech saying Rahul had indulged in “insinuation”, Telecom Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad responded that the PM has promised to implement a system that would ensure Internet is available in a “non-discriminatory” way. He also hit back at the Congress, saying a number of Twitter accounts were blocked in August 2012. “Why that had happened, the country would have to consider someday,” he said.
Prasad said he has already formed a committee to study the matter thoroughly and submit a report. “The report will be submitted in the second week of May. That apart, TRAI has the power to discuss the TRAI Act but it does not have the right to take a decision on it. That power rests with me (minister) and the Modi government.. That’s the course of the law,” he said. “When their recommendations come, the Telecom Commission will deliberate on it and then I will take a decision, the cabinet will take a decision.”
Prasad said the present government had earned Rs 1.1 lakh crore from spectrum auction. “The world knows what used to happen on this (spectrum auction) before this government. What happened in the coal auctions?” he said.
Prasad assured that the “the future of people’s right to Internet is safe and secure in this country… Also, our Prime Minister is among the most popular figures on social media, and we want to respect social media,” he said.
After Prasad’s reply, Rahul was seen rising from his seat to seek a clarification, which Speaker Sumitra Mahajan did not allow saying discussions were not allowed during question hour.
But outside the House, Rahul made it clear that he was not satisfied with the government’s reply and that he would continue to oppose the government’s move.
“I want to ask a question. If you (the government) have to protect Net neutrality, why did you begin the consultation process? It was a trial balloon. First float the trial balloon, see the reaction and if the reaction is strong then do not proceed. That is why we are opposing it tooth and nail, so that they withdraw,” Rahul told reporters.
Rahul in the morning gave a notice for suspension of Question Hour to take up an adjournment motion, then raised the issue in zero hour and accused the government of “dividing the Internet among big corporates”.
“There are discussions on issues like NREGA, Right to Food, but I want to say Net neutrality, in simple terms, means the right to Internet. Every youth must have the right to Internet,” he said. “The government wants to divide the Internet among big industrialists.”
Making a reference to the social media campaign for Net neutrality, Rahul said one million people have registered to fight for it. “Youth have voted and are asking on Twitter, on Facebook and on all other applications for Net neutrality,” he said.
While Parliamentary Affairs Minister Venkaiah Naidu objected to the speech saying Rahul had indulged in “insinuation”, Telecom Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad responded that the PM has promised to implement a system that would ensure Internet is available in a “non-discriminatory” way. He also hit back at the Congress, saying a number of Twitter accounts were blocked in August 2012. “Why that had happened, the country would have to consider someday,” he said.
Prasad said he has already formed a committee to study the matter thoroughly and submit a report. “The report will be submitted in the second week of May. That apart, TRAI has the power to discuss the TRAI Act but it does not have the right to take a decision on it. That power rests with me (minister) and the Modi government.. That’s the course of the law,” he said. “When their recommendations come, the Telecom Commission will deliberate on it and then I will take a decision, the cabinet will take a decision.”
Prasad said the present government had earned Rs 1.1 lakh crore from spectrum auction. “The world knows what used to happen on this (spectrum auction) before this government. What happened in the coal auctions?” he said.
Prasad assured that the “the future of people’s right to Internet is safe and secure in this country… Also, our Prime Minister is among the most popular figures on social media, and we want to respect social media,” he said.
After Prasad’s reply, Rahul was seen rising from his seat to seek a clarification, which Speaker Sumitra Mahajan did not allow saying discussions were not allowed during question hour.
But outside the House, Rahul made it clear that he was not satisfied with the government’s reply and that he would continue to oppose the government’s move.
“I want to ask a question. If you (the government) have to protect Net neutrality, why did you begin the consultation process? It was a trial balloon. First float the trial balloon, see the reaction and if the reaction is strong then do not proceed. That is why we are opposing it tooth and nail, so that they withdraw,” Rahul told reporters.
#NetNeutrality: Rahul says India needs a law to protect Internet
Rahul Gandhi wants to raise the Net Neutrality debate in Parliament.
“But this government wants to divide the Internet and hand it over to a few big companies. India needs a Net Neutrality law that won’t allow the Internet to be divided into parts,” said Gandhi.
After Rahul Gandhi’s statement, Union Minister holding Ministry of Communications and Information Technology Ravi Shankar Prasad, said that the government of India was committed to Net Neutrality. He also denied that the government was under pressure from any company.
It was earlier reported that Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi had sought suspension of Question Hour in Lok Sabha and gave a notice for an adjournment motion to discuss the matter of Net Neutrality immediately.
An adjournment motion involves an element of censure against the Government.
A strong plea was made yesterday in the Lower House for ensuring net neutrality with demands that the recent consultation paper brought out by TRAI should be scrapped and attempts by certain telecom and internet service providers be scuttled.
Raising the issue during Zero Hour, M B Rajesh (CPI-M) had alleged that the consultation paper brought out by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India was “blatantly supporting” assault on net neutrality by telecom and internet service providers.
Net Neutrality debate in India: Here are all the arguments you need to know
If you are one of India’s active netizens, it is unlikely that the
words Net Neutrality have escaped your daily dose of social media
updates and news. The debate, which gained pace 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.
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.”
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.
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.
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.”
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.
