Net Neutrality: Whose internet is it anyway?

When the Telecom Regulation Authority of India (TRAI) last month released a set of 20 questions, as part of a 110-page document, to Indian internet users asking for responses to neutrality on the internet, little did it expect the avalanche of emails that would follow. The regulatory body has reportedly received over 800,000 emails at the time of going to press, with five days to go for the April 24 deadline.

This only proves that Indian internet users not just love their internet dearly, but are also informed. After all, the internet is perhaps amongst the last few frontiers in the world that is an open space, allowing equal opportunities to everyone. To understand the Indian scenario, and how this debate erupted and captured the imagination of so many people, we have to understand first what net neutrality is.

Open space, equal opportunities
The principle of net neutrality means allowing equal access to every website or app by an internet service provider (ISP). The term was coined by American academic Tim Wu in 2003, and gained wide recognition in the debate in the US that unfolded with service provider Comcast throttling traffic at BitTorrent. This ensued in the decision taken by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to have an open internet in 2010. In India, without a debate, the issue of net neutrality has been widely flouted by ISPs over the years. ISPs routinely offer preferential services to bigger organisations in tie-ups. Some examples include Facebook's Internet.org, Aircel's Wikipedia Zero and its free access to Facebook and WhatsApp, Airtel's free access to Google, and Reliance's free access to Twitter.

Whose internet is it?
After TRAI's posted its paper, digital rights activists took it upon themselves to ensure that as many replies as possible went in. Many got together to form the savetheinternet.in, a website that tailored the answers, and all a user had to do was follow a two-step instruction to submit the answers. Many with an enormous internet presence, like All India Bakchod, actors Shah Rukh Khan and Parineeti Chopra, Tathagatha Sathpathy of the Biju Janata Dal (BJD), Aditya Thackeray of the Shiv Sena and musician Vishal Dadlani took to social media to pledge their support. It was not long before Communications Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad came up with his support too. In a press conference, as well as on Twitter, he said the internet is "one of the finest creations of human mind. It belongs to the entire humanity and not to a few". The minister assured that he was all for a free internet and had instituted a six-member committee in January to look into the matter.

People on social media were also not too happy over start-ups like Flipkart that did not have a pro-neutrality stand. Following a backlash and severe downgrading of its services on user websites, Flipkart was forced to announce its withdrawal from Airtel Zero, a plan in a way to allow start-ups better access to consumers for a fee. Following Flipkart's withdrawal, Airtel said the plan was only an open marketing platform. "The platform remains open to all companies who want to offer these toll free data services to their customers on a completely non discriminatory basis," said a statement.

Flipkart's withdrawal was followed by the withdrawal of NDTV, Cleartrip, Newshunt and the Times Group either wholly or partially from Facebook's internet.org, a similar platform that strived to be seen as different because of its aim to take internet to places where there was none. Many were opposed to the commercial motives of players aiding Facebook, like Reliance in India and Airtel in South Africa. This prompted Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg to extend his support, which was open to a lot of critique. "We fully support net neutrality. We want to keep the internet open. Net neutrality ensures network operators don't discriminate by limiting access to services you want to use. It's an essential part of the open internet, and we are fully committed to it," said Zuckerberg to an Indian daily. Many, however, questioned him on how could support net neutrality by allowing one ISP preference over the other.

The Indian scenario
According to the Internet and Mobile Association of India (IAMAI), there were almost 300 million internet users till December 2014, second only to China. Yet, internet penetration in the country stands at only 19 per cent. TRAI's attempt to regulate that internet is, therefore, crucial. The stands it takes today will govern the internet of the future. The regulatory body has been accused of a pro-telco tilt, and rightly so. The 20 questions that the industry body wanted the average user to respond to was thick with jargon and almost impossible to answer.

In an IAMAI discussion to brainstorm on the consultation paper and the answers, attended by both global and domestic internet firms like Facebook, Google, Snapdeal, and Saavn, 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."

In the only time TRAI chief Rahul Khullar has spoken on the matter, in this case another daily, he said the issue demands an intense debate, especially because it was playing out as a corporate war between a telco and a media house. This seemed to many a case of severe short sightedness. "TRAI is not a representative of telcos. It should remain consumer-friendly," said the India spokesperson of a reputed international internet firm.

In comparison, in November 2014, committed to a healthy debate on the issue, US President Barack Obama had said, "Net neutrality has been built into the fabric of the Internet since its creation — but it is also a principle that we cannot take for granted. We cannot allow internet service providers to restrict the best access or to pick winners and losers in the online marketplace for services and ideas."

The actions that will unfold henceforth will govern the rules of India's internet in the future, and as such must be formed carefully.