Free Basics and Net Neutrality.

Adhering to Basics & Freedom is a wonderful Leaders piece in 'The Hindu'  which captures the nuances of the 'Net Neutrality' and the leadership role played by our regulator at TRAI. (Telecom Regulatory Authority of India).

The key take away from this master piece, from my view are: "The latest ruling could no doubt set the tone for regulators across the globe, especially those of countries that have socio-economic features akin to India’s. More important, it would ensure that generations of Indians are not forced to be satisfied with services that pretend to be the Internet itself, robbing them of the real benefits of the medium... The ruling also suggests that while TRAI recognises the need for India to bridge the digital divide, it realises that compromising the basic ideals of the Internet is not the way to do it."

Another interesting dimension to this ruling is the complexity of the net and the way it is shaping up. In another interesting piece in The Hindu titled How Zuckerberg Got the Blues' the columnist brings out the internal concepts which have emerged in the ecosystem of internet of things to grab more of the dollars being increasingly made available on this platform, by tweaking the basics without he knowledge of the user.

All of these concepts, are basically working to wean away the customer to a corner as in a typical showroom. The attractive discounts and the prominent display, positioning in the show room and other tricks which are deployed in the malls and show rooms have their counterparts in the internet of things.

And that is alarming for the user who is not educated enough of the way these things work could easily be led astray. And that this is deliberately happening under the eyes of the regulators clearly demonstrate that not enough is being done to rein in this behaviour.

As  Sri Ram Sewak Sharma the TRAI chairman has shown to the world through his latest ruling, that glitz cannot sway the opinion of the informed, it is time for the rest of the world to take the cue and cooperate to bring in more transparency and change in behaviourial patterns of these organisaitons in the digital space, to chase their dollars while maintaining 'Net Neutrality' in the true spirit and letter.

Net Neutrality & Differential Pricing for Data Usage...

My submission to TRAI

Question 1: Should the TSPs be allowed to have differential pricing for data usage for accessing different websites, applications or platforms?

Answer: No. TSPs cannot be allowed to have differential pricing for Data usage for accessing different sites.

My reasons are:

1.    Such TSPs may even make it prohibitively expensive for accessing e.gov services, which could be potentially dangerous and legally untenable.

2.    Existing revenue models of TSPs are based on Net neutrality and revenue sharing. If TRAI allows this to be tweaked in favour of one TSP Reliance communications, there could be serious legal issue and governmental revenues can drop.

Question 2: If differential pricing for data usage is permitted, what measures should be adopted to ensure that the principles of non- discrimination, transparency, affordable internet access, competition and market entry and innovation are addressed?

Answer:

1.    It should stand the test of net neutrality.

2.    It should be fully under the control of an organization which is legally answerable to the Indian polity.

3.    It cannot be controlled even in the back end, by an organization who do not come within the jurisdiction of Indian law.

4.    It should be ‘No charge’ basis and not ‘Free’. ‘No charge’ should clearly confirm that the consumer is not charged for the ‘Free’ services used in his subsequent usage.

Question 3. Are there alternative methods/technologies/business models, other than differentiated tariff plans, available to achieve the objective of providing free internet access to the consumers? If yes, please suggest/describe these methods/technologies/business models. Also, describe the potential benefits and disadvantages associated with such methods/technologies/business models?

Answer:

Yes. There are existing models as in the case of Wikipedia or Google, which have maintained net neutrality and still managed to raise revenue. My suggestions are:

1.     A new aggregator model as being done by ‘Uber’ is worth exploring for such services. We must encourage formation and registration of ‘aggregator services, which can pool the spectrum available from various TSPs and offer services, where in the sole aim of the aggregator is to provide the services on ‘No Charge’ basis but can claim access to the data generated by usage. This would be something similar to lease of ‘asset’ by uber for a limited time and paying for the service to the asset owner while providing the customer a service. The aggregator can limit the utilization of the ‘No Charge’ services to certain period everyday or upto certain Down load limits.

2.    USO funds which are lying idle should be used for meeting the spreading of the ‘No charge’ services. These funds can be transferred on DBT basis to eligible classified citizens. The citizen will choose the services, pay the bills and claim reimbursement from the government; else the payment can be transferred in advance every month.

Question-4: Is there any other issue that should be considered in the present consultation on differential pricing for data services?

Answer: Yes.

1.    With the emphasis on digitization of most of the government services, it is the duty of the government to provide the internet services to all of its citizens on ‘ No charge’ basis to the extent they use its service for their own needs to access governmental departments.

2.    The government will be a major beneficiary as the cost of providing the service physically is greatly reduced if done digitally and this savings should ,be used to bear the cost of availing internet services from any TSP.  

3.    More specifically, health related access, access to provide law and order, internal security, if done through the digital media can be far more effective and the benefits could be universal.

4.    These can not be allowed to be hijacked for profitability and it is the duty of TRAI to ensure that excessive profits are not generated at the pretext of providing ‘Free service’

'Face Book' becoming an 'Apple'

I love 'Apple' products and have been an ardent follower since 2007 and user of their products. I love the touch and feel of their products, starting from unpacking as designed by the legendary forward thinker Steve Jobs. I love their intuitive interface. 

As I continued the patronage over the years, I came across their limitations and specifically imposed restrictions and realised that I was missing out on some of the advancements happening else where in the technical world. 

Being resident of Chennai India, I realised that Nokia had a maps application which will never be matched by Apple especially for navigating the local towns and cities.  I therefore used a Nokia phone and found that I had to come back to iPhone for manny of my daily uses. Maps was not my daily need. 

Then as Android developed and Google Now became so user friendly and Samsung introduced new features, which I would love to have in iPhone, but not available, I shifted to Motorola for a season. Here I found the hardware did not support and there was no substitute for the iStore. 

So I have returned to Apple. But to be fair to 'Apple' they have been restrictive and pricy. They do not pretend to offer 'Free' services or 'No cost' and they do not appeal in a disguised manner. They are bold, assertive and very clear that this is what they offer and you are with them knowing that they are restrictive. 

I love Facebook. The platform has helped me connect with my old contacts, reconnect with relatives, and add new contacts. Doing all this I stay connected 'Off Line' while remaining disconnected whenever I choose to. I love the 'Likes' which I receive and am comfortable no body can 'Dis Like' me or my messages. Since 2008, I have been on Facebook and have loved its growth and is a witness to its transformation into a full fledged social platform. 

Unlike Apple, Face Book has chosen the surreptitious path to monetise patronage. So anyone who can understand the basic workings know that there is a cost to using the so called 'Free' services and 'Free' account in Face Book or for that matter your G Mail account. 

So when they offer 'Free Basics' and advertise it as 'Free' I sit up and take notice. And their recent ad blitz bringing 'Ganesha and family' into picture, is highly hypocritical and downright condemnable. If they want to dominate a market, there are other routes. The route chosen by them is  ill advised. 

It may bring them success in the short term. But as an 'Argumentative Indian' I will caution that the path chosen by them is wrong and is bound to bring out an alternative, again from their own silicon valley. They are poor in making choices in India, as is evident when they tied up with a closed opaque organisation like ADAG group in the first place. They invite our Prime Minister host him, and then fly over here to meet him and then offer 'Free Basis'. So their moves are well thought out and one tends to believe that it has the sanction of the government and ruling party. 

Why they are doing all this? It is obvious as they want to ensure that their are relevant in the years to come and ensure the exponential growth which they have shown their share holders. They want to become an 'Apple' in terms of earnings and appeal and believe that this can be done through restrictive access being provided. They want o become an Apple but surreptitiously.  

I do not like that. I do not like a company not accountable to Indian Law advising me and show to be empathising with my citizens, with a motive. I vote against this move and recommend that they withdraw. 

I for one have already seen the growth of LinkedIn network and am spending more time on it than Facebook on a working day. Yes the days when I am off and want to connect with the other network I log on to face book. 

Growth sometime brings with it amazing greed and socio political ambitions. But it also makes them commit errors, which may turn out to be blunders and eventually be responsible for their downfall. 

A seven year old organisation advising us, the Indian Government, and its citizens is very poor in taste and for the first time I feel that the politicians deafening silence, on this move of Facebook   shows their tacit consent and their own personal agenda. 

I wish and prey, - yes only prayer can help - that TRAI rules against such a move. I request everyone to answer the four questions asked by TRAI in its "Consultation paper on Differential Pricing for Data Services" and support net neutrality. TRAI Differential Pricing for Data.pdf