Net Neutrality argues that every online site or app should be accessible to the consumer without telecom companies charging extra fees for priority access. But India's biggest telecom company, along with one of the country’s top e-retailers, has already violated this principle
This newspaper has always argued for the freedom of Indian citizens to be able to surf the Internet and speak their minds on the Internet. A recent Supreme Court two-judge Bench scrapped the contentious Section 66(A) of the Information Technology Act which had been introduced as a poison pill by the United Progressive Alliance, thereby, making a mockery of the word ‘progressive’ in its name. The Modi Government should have been more pro-active in removing the law as it had become a joke, recently, when a class 11 student was arrested for apparently insulting Uttar Pradesh Minister Azam Khan. That said, the BJP Government can take a stand on Internet freedom in a completely different battle — the battle for Net Neutrality. This topic has been needlessly made controversial a recent paper, authored by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India, which strongly favours telecom operators charging ‘rent’, in a matter of speaking, from service providers to provide services to the customers.
Telecom operators have been arguing that Internet services are eating their lunch and it is their ‘right’ to charge this ‘rent’. They have also argued that by charging this ‘rent’ — and let us not make any bones about the term, it is an illegal ‘rent’, no less than a form of extortion that telecom service providers are charging — they are trying to stay afloat. An example that is often cited is that of WhatsApp. This popular online-based messaging service has completely decimated the personal text messaging market. Service providers, who used to rub their hands with glee when they ripped-off customers on festive occasions by charging usurious rates for messaging, have been left high and dry with the advent of WhatsApp and other similar online mobile services.
Net Neutrality has a simple argument — every service and online site should be served to the customer without any undue priority in lieu of money. This money is the extortion or ‘rent’ we spoke about earlier. For example, this could be in the form of charging consumers an additional sum of money to access WhatsApp. Similarly, a telecom service provider can also charge a company to enable customers to access a site or use an application for ‘free’.
This is what is happening today. Airtel, India’s largest telecom service provider, is spinning a blatant violation of Net Neutrality principles as beneficial to the customers. Airtel, which had earlier proposed a higher data charge from its customers to use online messaging service and particularly the Voice over Internet Protocol, is now quite clearly using the other foot. Airtel claims that this service will benefit the customers by making data on a particular website or application available for free.
One of the companies that has signed up to pay ‘rent’ is Flipkart. Forget the fact that this is a company that has been accused of massive tax evasion. By paying ‘rent’ to Airtel, to make access to its app free, it is trying to spin this arrangement as beneficial to the consumer as a frequent user of the Flipkart app benefits by not paying data charges anymore. However, and apologies for the pun, the flip side is that such a deal discriminates against other online marketplaces — such as, a small online one selling groceries in a particular area of New Delhi which cannot offer to pay ‘rent’ to a telecom service provider. Without a Net Neutrality law in place, the telecom service provider can degrade the quality of the data connection to this small app or website because a big competitor is paying the telecom service provider money for better access. Take messaging as an example: Suppose a family member of the promoter runs a messaging service that has not been doing very well. Can the telecom operator degrade the level of service to other competing messaging servicesIJ Surely, it can.
A simple question here: Is it fairIJ Certainly, it is not. A customer of the telecom service provider is already paying the company a significant amount of money to provide unfettered data access. What the consumer uses that data package for — short of using it for terrorism or to promote something disgusting as paedophilia — is none of the telecom service providers’ concern. Of the two things mentioned, it is the concern of the police and the Government.
Telecom operators are like a pipeline; they charge the consumers for using the pipeline. One can choose to use that pipeline to access someone else’s pipeline through a phone call and the telecom service provider is fully entitled to charge for that. Someone else can say that he needs a fatter, bigger pipe because he uses it much more and yes, the service providers should charge for the bigger fatter pipe. Telecom service providers providing data services should clearly work towards improving the pipe, which, frankly, right now is in a state of disrepair, thanks to the greed of service providers.
One analogy an editor recent gave justified the violation of Net Neutrality principles on the basis of what airlines do. But air travel is still a luxury for the larger part of India, data services are not. The better analogy here will be to pipes again. In this case, think of sewage pipes, for which most consumers already pay a certain amount which is added to their water bill. How would you feel if you were told that you could only use one particular toilet in your house because that sewage pipe was being paid for by an advertiserIJ If you used another toilet, you would have to pay a lot of money. Sure, many people love free stuff but people also love freedom — the freedom to choose. Think about it for a minute or two. What is free today may not be free tomorrow.
Also, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has publicly announced the Digital India programme that aims to make India into a fully digital economy by massive investments. This will benefit telecom service providers by bringing more customers into their fold. But if the principles of Net Neutrality are not adhered to, telecom service providers, no matter the lovely language that they use, will be no better than the hafta-collecting bouncers at the gate.
This will not do.