Re: Airtel wants to pierce net neutrality, charges more for VoIP

Is this backtracking while trying some face-saving, or just a fixed match ?
Seems to be a running joke of sorts...

On one hand, Airtel has dropped plans to charge extra for now, citing the
ball being in TRAI's court:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/tech/tech-news/Airtel-drops-plan-to-charge-extra-for-Viber-Skype-calls/articleshow/45673580.cms

while on the other hand, TRAI has already taken a stand 2 days back, that
net neutrality isn't it's concern:
http://gadgets.ndtv.com/telecom/news/trai-chairman-on-airtels-voip-plans-net-neutrality-not-our-concern-640533


On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 2:15 PM, ken <[email protected]> wrote:

>  With all due respect, the idea that the free market will cure these ills
> is somewhat misguided. The most immediate challenge to address is the lack
> of resources, whether we consider those resources to be spectrum or pole
> location/right of way for wireline services.
>
> If we drill down on the spectrum issue, we find that in densely populated
> locations, it would be impossible to support very many independent
> competitors before all the available spectrum would be saturated.
>
> Turning to the wireline path, both the cost to install fiber (or copper
> lines) as well as available pole space (or continued construction in the
> right of way) makes unending addition of competition impractical if not
> impossible.
>
> More to the point is the barrier to entry created by the total cost to
> build out such a network.
>
> Additionally, the issue of return on investment, where the bulk of the
> competitors will focus only on the locations which will support the highest
> returns is problematic. In the US we refer to this process as "redlining"
> where we see one side of a street being serviced by fiber and the other
> having low bit rate DSL. Reduced to its simplest, this allows some
> corporate bureaucrat to arbitrarily assign who will see service and who
> won't with the end effect being the creation of a digital divide,
> oftentimes setting the property values in a given area or choosing which
> business location will survive or die.
>
> Please note - at no time am I suggesting that competition isn't a good
> thing but rather explaining why, in practice, when limited resources are
> turned over to the free market, the implementation is typically
> catastrophic.
>
> In short, we have a problem, let's not exacerbate it.
>
> Ken DiPietro
> Been there/Done that/Still carry the scars.
>
>
> On 12/28/2014 04:40 PM, Ratnendra Pandey wrote:
>
> We  should allow Airtel to charge for VOIP or streaming if market would
> let it do so.  And we should also allow consumers to choose a provider with
> whom they agree on charges and service levels. This will bring more profits
> into the industry which will be then followed by more suppliers trying to
> take a share out of that profit.   The consumers best bet is a strong
> competition providers, a  market in which suppliers are fighting like cats
> and dogs for business from consumers.
>
>   The problem is VOIP is prohibited in India ( My knowledge of Indian
> telecom my be outdated. I would like to be excused and corrected if the
> facts have changed).  The consumers will immensely benefit if we have free
> competition among providers and consumer use their purchasing power and
> market knowledge to  pick the right services. These kind of disputes will
> disappear if the market is freed and innovation is allowed in product and
> services.
>
> Some have suggested net-neutrality. All the talk of net-neutrality is a
> backdoor effort to bring more government interference into already
> substandard internet/telecom market in India. We may like to talk of fancy
> words like net-neutrality and what not. But, I think the focus should be on
> making high quality internet available to anyone who is willing to pay
> market price for it.
>
>
> If I have to make a choice between net-neutrality and net-availability.
> Net-availability will be my choice.  I do not want an inferior internet
> that net-neutrality will bring.
>
> Instead suggesting more restrictions on Airtel, why do we not petition for
> opening markets and removing legal barriers on commercialization of any
> technology?
>
> Sincerely,
> Ratnendra Pandey
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------
> Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2014 06:40:24 +0530
> From: [email protected]
> To: [email protected]
> CC: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [india-gii] Airtel wants to pierce net neutrality, charges
> more for VoIP
>
> Is anyone aware of any organised response / reaction to this issue? The
> line silence is deafening
>
> On Thu, Dec 25, 2014 at 10:51 PM, Srini RamaKrishnan <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> Airtel to charge up to 16 times* the standard data rate for using
> Skype and other VoIP services
>
> Airtel seems to be implying that this move has TRAI sanction.
>
> *per rate mentioned in other newspapers
>
> --
>
> Airtel wants you to pay extra for using Skype, Viber, more
>
> If you use services like Skype or Viber to make calls over Airtel's
> mobile data network, be prepared to pay extra. Yes, we know you
> already pay Airtel for for that data. Doesn't matter. Airtel has added
> this line to the terms and conditions of its 2G and 3G data plans:
> "All Internet/data packs or plans (through which customer can avail
> discounted rate) shall only be valid for internet browsing and will
> exclude VoIP (Both incoming/ Outgoing). VoIP over data connectivity
> would be charged at standard data rates of 4p / 10 KB (3G service) and
> 10p / 10 KB (2G service)."
>
> VoIP, or Voice over IP, simply means voice data that is tranferred
> over the internet. The next time you're shooting the breeze on Viber,
> Skype or Google Hangouts on your phone, keep in mind that Airtel will
> charge you you even if you're already paying for that data.
>
> Airtel's move flies in the face of net neutrality, which is a hot
> topic round the globe. In the United States, for instance, there is a
> proposal to provide "fast lanes" for data intensive video-streaming
> services like Netflix and Hulu. Simply put, internet services
> providers want to charge these companies extra for carrying their bits
> to the consumer, even though the consumers are already paying the
> service providers for internet access in the first place. Last month,
> President Barack Obama came out strongly in support of net neutrality
> by saying that "a free and open internet was as critical to Americans'
> lives as electricity and telephone service and should be regulated
> like those utilities to protect consumers."
>
> The timing of this move isn't surprising. Whatsapp, which has wiped
> off a large part of SMS revenues for mobile service providers in
> India, has long been rumoured to introduce voice-calling over data.
> Indians already pay some of the lowest rates in the world for voice
> calls and carriers like Airtel are afraid that once people start using
> data to make voice calls, these revenues will be wiped out as well.
>
> Indeed, in August, the Telecom Regulation Authority of India (TRAI)
> had quashed a proposal from Indian telecom companies to charge
> over-the-top players like Whatsapp and Viber extra "connectivity
> charges." TRAI stated that telcos could make up for the lost revenue
> with the increase in mobile data usage.
>
> In a statement to Hindustan Times, an Airtel spokesperson said: "We
> have made some revisions in the composition of our data packs, and
> will offer VoIP (Voice over internet protocol) connectivity through an
> independent pack that will be launched shortly. Our customers can
> continue enjoying voice calls over data connectivity by opting for
> this VoIP pack, or simply use VoIP services on pay-as-you-go basis."
>
> Which basically means this: unless you buy a seperate VoIP pack,
> you'll be charged extra for making calls using Skype, Viber and other
> services. If you don't think net neutrality is something to lose sleep
> over yet, think about this: If it's VoIP today, operators might start
> charging you extra to stream YouTube or use a music service like Saavn
> tomorrow. It is not immediately clear if other operators will follow
> Airtel's move.
>
> http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/Print/1300013.aspx
> © Copyright © 2013 HT Media Limited. All Rights Reserved.
>
> _______________________________________________
> India-gii mailing list
> India-gii-IAPFreCvJWP2/[email protected]
> https://lists.india-gii.org/mailman/listinfo/india-gii
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________ India-gii mailing list
> India-gii-IAPFreCvJWP2/[email protected]
> https://lists.india-gii.org/mailman/listinfo/india-gii
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> India-gii mailing listIndia-gii-IAPFreCvJWP2/[email protected]://lists.india-gii.org/mailman/listinfo/india-gii
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> India-gii mailing list
> India-gii-IAPFreCvJWP2/[email protected]
> https://lists.india-gii.org/mailman/listinfo/india-gii
>
>


-- 
regards,
Banibrata
http://www.linkedin.com/in/bdutta
http://twitter.com/edgeliving

_______________________________________________
India-gii mailing list
India-gii-IAPFreCvJWP2/[email protected]
https://lists.india-gii.org/mailman/listinfo/india-gii