Subject: [gaia] Fwd: Web Foundation responds to India consultation on net neutrality

From: willi uebelherr <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 16:45:52 -0300

Dear friends,

this email i received from the Web Foundation. It is a very good 
contribution to our discussions to net neutrality in a concrete environment.

many greetings, willi
Asuncion, Paraguay

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Web Foundation responds to India consultation on net neutrality
Date: 	Wed, 15 Mar 2017 14:21:52 +0000
From: 	Web Foundation <>

Web Foundation responds to India consultation on net neutrality

Net neutrality — the principle that all internet traffic be treated 
equally — is fundamental to our mission to deliver digital equality — a 
world where everyone has the same rights and opportunities online. Why? 
If dominant content providers can pay to have their traffic prioritised, 
it risks harming competition and innovation, while limiting freedom of 
expression. If governments block or censor content that they do not 
agree with, it hurts free speech and democracy.

Today, in partnership with the Digital Empowerment Foundation 
<https://defindia.org/>(DEF), the Web Foundation has made a submission 
<http://webfoundation.org/docs/2017/03/WFDEFResponsetoTRAIcallforcommentsonNN-Mar14-FINAL.pdf> 
to an important consultation on net neutrality in India. Responding to 
questions from Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), the Web 
Foundation and DEF have jointly made four key recommendations:

*1) Consider introducing a no-fee basic data allowance*
Today, mobile broadband penetration is India is estimated to be less 
than 10% (GSMA Intelligence Q4 2016). Addressing this challenge will 
require innovative interventions which should be encouraged by the 
government. However, we argue that interventions to provide access for 
low-income and/or marginalised communities must also adhere to net 
neutrality principles, as they should for all Indians. Previous attempts 
in India include zero-rating programmes which restricted users to a 
limited set of sites or services, and these proved controversial. 
Meanwhile, research 
<http://1e8q3q16vyc81g8l3h3md6q5f5e.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/MeasuringImpactsofMobileDataServices_ResearchBrief2.pdf>by 
the Alliance for Affordable Internet has suggested such zero rating 
initiatives are not effective in bringing new users online, and that 
users would rather have free access to the whole internet, even if it is 
limited by time or data allocation. Our joint suggestion is for TRAI to 
explore ways to provide a basic monthly data allowance. Other countries, 
such as Colombia 
<http://a4ai.org/affordability-report/report/2017/#which_countries_top_the_2017_adi?>, 
are already experimenting with such policies: given the size of India’s 
market and the country’s global influence, the successful implementation 
of such an initiative could be world-leading and transformative.

*2) Encourage TSPs to make detailed information available on important 
areas such as quality of service and network neutrality compliance— in 
open data formats wherever possible*
In order for regulators, citizens and civil society to monitor progress 
and ensure traffic management practices abide by net neutrality 
guidelines, detailed information that can easily be analysed is needed. 
For this reason, we propose that TSPs be required to make detailed, 
technical filings with TRAI either quarterly or bi-annually, and to post 
the results on their websites too. Wherever feasible, this information 
should be released as open data 
<https://blog.okfn.org/2013/10/03/defining-open-data/>— free for anyone 
to reuse or analyse — in order to maximise transparency and accountability.

*3) Don’t ban paid service-specific data bundles *—*unless there is a 
relationship between mobile operators and content providers*
We argue that application-specific traffic discrimination should not be 
allowed. However, one exception is the case of service-specific data 
bundles — where TSPs charge different rates for access to certain sites 
or applications. Such bundles can be a good way for operators to respond 
to customer demand and devise innovative ways for more people to connect 
and communicate affordably. As such, we recommend that they should be 
encouraged, with any complaints dealt with on a case-by-case basis. The 
caveats, of course, are if there is a commercial relationship between 
TSPs and the sites or applications included in the bundle or if the 
content is not available on a non-exclusive basis to all TSPs; in such 
cases, we believe that service-specific data bundles should not be allowed.

*4) Consider creating a dedicated advisory committee on net neutrality 
*—*with representatives from government, business and civil society*
It is clear that net neutrality is a vital issue. Preserving and 
enhancing it will help Indian entrepreneurs and established businesses 
alike, and can help millions more to connect affordably. Yet it is also 
a complex issue, which will continue to shift and evolve over time. For 
this reason, we recommend that TRAI considers establishing a dedicated 
advisory committee on net neutrality, made up of representatives from 
business, government, academia and civil society. One of the most 
important mandates of this committee would be to explore the 
implications of emerging technologies on the principles of network 
neutrality, which TRAI should revisit every two years to allow for agile 
policy design. We do not envision this body as one that can take actions 
in case of any violation of network neutrality. However, the committee 
would be able to make recommendations directly to TRAI.

/The Web Foundation also made a submission to TRAI’s previous 
consultation on net neutrality in 2015, which can be //accessed here/ 
<http://webfoundation.org/2015/04/net-neutrality-india/>/. /

/The Digital Empowerment Foundation’s’ previous submissions can be 
accessed below:/

   * /////Submission on Consultation Paper on Differential pricing for
     Data Services/
 
<http://www.internetrights.in/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Submission-on-Differential-Pricing_CounterComments_Digital-Empowerment-Foundation.pdf>
   * /////Submission on Consultation Paper on OTT Services/
 
<http://www.internetrights.in/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/net_neutrality_def.pdf>
   * /////Submission on Consultation on Free Data Provision/
 
<http://www.internetrights.in/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/DEF_Comments-on-Free-Data-Consultation-Paper_Final.pdf>
   * /////Submission on Pre-Consultation Paper on net Neutrality/
 
<http://www.internetrights.in/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/DEF_Comments-on-NN-Pre-Consultation-Paper.pdf>

For updates on net neutrality and other issues, follow us on twitter at 
@webfoundation <http://twitter.com/webfoundation> and sign up to our 
mailing list <http://eepurl.com/WxB9j>

---

From: Tomslin Samme-Nlar <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 07:52:37 +1100

Thanks for sharing Willi.

I am finding it hard to understand the benefits of recommendation 3.
"Don’t ban paid service-specific data bundles"

Cheers,
Tomslin

On 16 Mar 2017 6:47 a.m., "willi uebelherr" <[email-masked]>
wrote:

Dear friends,

many greetings, willi
Asuncion, Paraguay

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Web Foundation responds to India consultation on net neutrality
Date:   Wed, 15 Mar 2017 14:21:52 +0000
From:   Web Foundation <>

Net neutrality — the principle that all internet traffic be treated equally
— is fundamental to our mission to deliver digital equality — a world where
everyone has the same rights and opportunities online. Why? If dominant
content providers can pay to have their traffic prioritised, it risks
harming competition and innovation, while limiting freedom of expression.
If governments block or censor content that they do not agree with, it
hurts free speech and democracy.

Today, in partnership with the Digital Empowerment Foundation <
https://defindia.org/>(DEF), the Web Foundation has made a submission <
http://webfoundation.org/docs/2017/03/WFDEFResponsetoTRAIca
llforcommentsonNN-Mar14-FINAL.pdf> to an important consultation on net
neutrality in India. Responding to questions from Telecom Regulatory
Authority of India (TRAI), the Web Foundation and DEF have jointly made
four key recommendations:

*1) Consider introducing a no-fee basic data allowance*
Today, mobile broadband penetration is India is estimated to be less than
10% (GSMA Intelligence Q4 2016). Addressing this challenge will require
innovative interventions which should be encouraged by the government.
However, we argue that interventions to provide access for low-income
and/or marginalised communities must also adhere to net neutrality
principles, as they should for all Indians. Previous attempts in India
include zero-rating programmes which restricted users to a limited set of
sites or services, and these proved controversial. Meanwhile, research <
http://1e8q3q16vyc81g8l3h3md6q5f5e.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/
wp-content/uploads/2016/05/MeasuringImpactsofMobileDataServi
ces_ResearchBrief2.pdf>by the Alliance for Affordable Internet has
suggested such zero rating initiatives are not effective in bringing new
users online, and that users would rather have free access to the whole
internet, even if it is limited by time or data allocation. Our joint
suggestion is for TRAI to explore ways to provide a basic monthly data
allowance. Other countries, such as Colombia <http://a4ai.org/affordability
-report/report/2017/#which_countries_top_the_2017_adi?>, are already
experimenting with such policies: given the size of India’s market and the
country’s global influence, the successful implementation of such an
initiative could be world-leading and transformative.

*2) Encourage TSPs to make detailed information available on important
areas such as quality of service and network neutrality compliance— in open
data formats wherever possible*
In order for regulators, citizens and civil society to monitor progress and
ensure traffic management practices abide by net neutrality guidelines,
detailed information that can easily be analysed is needed. For this
reason, we propose that TSPs be required to make detailed, technical
filings with TRAI either quarterly or bi-annually, and to post the results
on their websites too. Wherever feasible, this information should be
released as open data <https://blog.okfn.org/2013/10/03/defining-open-data/>—
free for anyone to reuse or analyse — in order to maximise transparency and
accountability.

*3) Don’t ban paid service-specific data bundles *—*unless there is a
relationship between mobile operators and content providers*
We argue that application-specific traffic discrimination should not be
allowed. However, one exception is the case of service-specific data
bundles — where TSPs charge different rates for access to certain sites or
applications. Such bundles can be a good way for operators to respond to
customer demand and devise innovative ways for more people to connect and
communicate affordably. As such, we recommend that they should be
encouraged, with any complaints dealt with on a case-by-case basis. The
caveats, of course, are if there is a commercial relationship between TSPs
and the sites or applications included in the bundle or if the content is
not available on a non-exclusive basis to all TSPs; in such cases, we
believe that service-specific data bundles should not be allowed.

*4) Consider creating a dedicated advisory committee on net neutrality
*—*with representatives from government, business and civil society*
It is clear that net neutrality is a vital issue. Preserving and enhancing
it will help Indian entrepreneurs and established businesses alike, and can
help millions more to connect affordably. Yet it is also a complex issue,
which will continue to shift and evolve over time. For this reason, we
recommend that TRAI considers establishing a dedicated advisory committee
on net neutrality, made up of representatives from business, government,
academia and civil society. One of the most important mandates of this
committee would be to explore the implications of emerging technologies on
the principles of network neutrality, which TRAI should revisit every two
years to allow for agile policy design. We do not envision this body as one
that can take actions in case of any violation of network neutrality.
However, the committee would be able to make recommendations directly to
TRAI.

/The Web Foundation also made a submission to TRAI’s previous consultation
on net neutrality in 2015, which can be //accessed here/ <
http://webfoundation.org/2015/04/net-neutrality-india/>/. /

/The Digital Empowerment Foundation’s’ previous submissions can be accessed
below:/

<http://www.internetrights.in/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Sub
mission-on-Differential-Pricing_CounterComments_Digital-
Empowerment-Foundation.pdf>
  * /////Submission on Consultation Paper on OTT Services/

<http://www.internetrights.in/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/net
_neutrality_def.pdf>
  * /////Submission on Consultation on Free Data Provision/

<http://www.internetrights.in/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/DEF
_Comments-on-Free-Data-Consultation-Paper_Final.pdf>
  * /////Submission on Pre-Consultation Paper on net Neutrality/

<http://www.internetrights.in/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/DEF
_Comments-on-NN-Pre-Consultation-Paper.pdf>

_______________________________________________
To manage your ISOC subscriptions or unsubscribe,
please log into the ISOC Member Portal:
https://portal.isoc.org/
Then choose Interests & Subscriptions from the My Account menu.

---

From: Joly MacFie <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 17:43:31 -0400

By coincidence, yesterday I had a paid gig shooting an investment meeting.
One of the presenters was http://www.mavin.co/ who, under the name Gigato,
is in the business of selling free data sponsorships in India. Anybody can
pay to sponsor free data, say 1GB or more, to an end user, perhaps as a
loyalty reward. The proviso is that this can be used by the recipient to
access any content/service they like.

Apparently this is looked on with favor by the local regulators as a method
of enabling access to the underserved while not walling off any gardens.
And the company is doing very well.

​j​

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 4:52 PM, Tomslin Samme-Nlar <[email-masked]>
wrote:

> world where everyone has the same rights and opportunities online. Why? If
> dominant content providers can pay to have their traffic prioritised, it
> risks harming competition and innovation, while limiting freedom of
> expression. If governments block or censor content that they do not agree
> with, it hurts free speech and democracy.
>
> allowance. Other countries, such as Colombia <
> http://a4ai.org/affordability-report/report/2017/#which_cou
> ntries_top_the_2017_adi?>, are already experimenting with such policies:
> given the size of India’s market and the country’s global influence, the
> successful implementation of such an initiative could be world-leading and
> transformative.
>
> and ensure traffic management practices abide by net neutrality guidelines,
> released as open data <https://blog.okfn.org/2013/10
> /03/defining-open-data/>— free for anyone to reuse or analyse — in order
> to maximise transparency and accountability.
>
> mission-on-Differential-Pricing_CounterComments_Digital-Empo
> werment-Foundation.pdf>

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
Joly MacFie  218 565 9365 <(218)%20565-9365> Skype:punkcast
--------------------------------------------------------------
-