TRAI organizes an open debate in the present day on the "Regulatory Framework for OTT Services" in Bangalore. The aim of the consultation is to examine the providers that they could contemplate "similar" to the providers offered by telecommunications service suppliers. The consultation doc seeks to match the licensing guidelines and laws applicable to the TSP and the OTT on the idea of the substitutability of sure providers they supply. The TRAI chairman has additionally just lately voiced his concern concerning the authority with regard to the OTT.
All quotes are paraphrased. The competitors we are talking about has several ways to cope with this. It isn’t like comparable features are usually not out there elsewhere. Competitors should not be prevented. Anyone who needs to be an OTT or ISP should give you the option to do so. Decreasing competitors to the thought of equality is just not an excellent concept
The next query:
Q.4 OTT OTT Interoperability of OTT providers and interoperability of their providers with TSP providers promote competition and profit customers? What measures may be taken to promote such competitors, if any? Please justify your reply with justification.
1237hrs, Reliance Jio: Shoppers don't care about how communication takes place. Subsequently, it is vital that there’s a risk of authorized interception at the OTT. TSPs are subject to strict national security laws. In the intervening time, the identical info could be communicated to each, but within the OTT with out worrying whether or not he’s liable for communication. Subsequently, we advocate that OTT be obtained for lawful abduction, but in addition for localization of knowledge. Most right here would agree that the position of OTT communication within the area of terrorism and nationwide security is rising. GoI submitted 163 requests to the main platform and most have been rejected. Once more, we ask that the provisions of legal abduction ought to be reconsidered and that it is obliged to answer the TSPs.
1234hrs Devashish Bhattacharya, BIF: We keep privateness protection. Encryption is predicated on shopper demand. The position of encryption is essential. Subsequently it cannot be ignored. As mentioned above, authorized abduction is obtainable beneath the IT regulation. Although interception is important, encryption can also be necessary for safety and privacy, because the Supreme Courtroom confirms
For Query 6, if OTTs will not be related to PSTN and PMLN, if some providers are allowed, it’s simpler, however we advocate EU monitoring, the place it’s allowed for number-based providers, and various unbiased providers might be reviewed later.
1231hrs, Vinay Kesari, Setu: I agree with Amritan, it is troublesome to answer the question 5 without encryption. I additionally agree that OTT's communication is just not lawful intercept topic. It is very important think about the benefits of a call in each of the totally different providers. Is there a state of affairs the place the OTT software could be reside and related to the community with out the telephone being related to the community? The only instance is related to the wifi community without being related to the network. Is this sufficient to empower? If yes, it is very important set up a minumim consumer base above which this implementation will develop into crazy – in any other case it should develop into too pregnant within the start-up part.
1228hrs, Mahesh Uppal: This question does not hyperlink safety issues to what we try to discuss right here. This is already being mentioned on the similar time. We need to acknowledge the differences and let them separate from each other. I agree with Mr. Bhatia emergency providers. What the EU does is fascinating. But now OTT players usually are not even demanding to hitch the PSTN. I recommend that we attempt our greatest to answer question 6 and different questions about OTT with IT regulation.
1226hrs: Amrita Chaudhary, CCAOI: There are already discussions in query 5. view encryption. For lots of public administration providers, it is rather essential that we are capable of provide and receive protected providers. We’d like encryption. There may be a debate, however providers which might be encrypted in banking, for example, are essential. Networks are shielded from community assaults. Encryption is needed for the whole ecosystem
1224h, ITAPT Bharat Bhat: I feel query 5 has already been handled nicely. In Query 6, I feel it’s about how emergency providers are up to date to get information about OTT platforms. I can't complain about whatsapp call practices. Making a video call to "100" is just not the case. We must give them the opportunity to get info from OTT. Users want emergency providers from OTT players. It might be by way of communication, video, it solely occurs to a restricted extent, particularly whether it is “112”. The subsequent question is whether or not it may be prolonged to OTT. We will insist that as a result of the OTTs are consumed to a large extent, we will require them to comply with them as nicely. Middleman tips already tackle query 5.
1213hrs, Sanjeev Varma, Reliance Jio: We consider nationwide safety and privacy are paramount. In the context of listening to laws, this is a vital concern for OTT. OTT's practices must be modified. First, the situation of the info switch. Presently, consumer knowledge is stored in India, which does not permit investigators to entry knowledge. We advocate that you simply save your knowledge regionally. Another change is end-to-end encryption. That is finished underneath consumer security. Nevertheless, that is being misused for activities that intrude with nationwide security. This should subsequently cope with nationwide security. Australia has already passed an invoice where investigative our bodies can monitor the release of data by OTT gamers. Some other laws have to be stored by the authorities so that they can be investigated sooner or later. Consumer traceability should also be carried out with a view to cope with counterfeit information, violence and terrorism. Identifying a consumer is essential to handle counterfeit identities. We consider that OTT and TSP are comparable and used for comparable purposes.
For emergency providers, we advocate that TRAI deploy the same status as VoIP, the place it’s inspired however not approved.
Q.5 Are there any points associated to the legal interception of OTT communications that have to be resolved by nationwide safety or different security measures that have to be launched? Ought to the duties of OTT providers and TSP be separated?
Q6 Can emergency providers be obtainable by way of OTT platforms in accordance with the necessities imposed on telecom operators? Make recommendations with reasoning
1210hrs, Bharat Bhat: I need to speak about 5G. 5G is a totally new network. If you go to 5G, your funding in IoT is great. There is a large funding in emergency providers and different providers. The investments usually are not within the telco subject, but they arrive regardless of the licensing system. We have now to be sure that what we determine is related within the era of IoT and machine communication
1203hrs, Vinay Kesari, Setu: A easy answer to 3 is not any. Telcos primarily expenses info immediately. OTTs on no account negatively affect their capability to pay. There’s nonetheless a pricing drawback, TSPs are unable to charge their charges to completely get well their costs. OTT's dumping content in TSP is a harmful analogue. This content material is initiated by the buyer and not by OTT. A shopper whose appetite for content increases. OTTs do not add to this. TSPs are carriers, they don’t seem to be lakes. The question of whether or not telecommunications is two-sided is an fascinating question – the regulatory issues of dialogue and interconnection are rising. Netflix is charged for peering operations in different nations.
1201 hours, Chaudhary, CCAOI; Someone mentioned that OTTs and TSPs are useful to both. It's not about us, it's about cooperation. Telecom needs to enhance its business. TSPs and OTT make investments to get users, however require funding because you use the service, which impacts shopper pricing. Indians are a price-conscious consumer market. Smarter Plans Wanted For Investments, You Can't Draw Other Players With You Because You Are Not
1159hrs, Uppal: TSP must understand that some purposes are heavy, and suggests that it’s associated to license imbalance, is inaccurate. This is not a worldwide debate. The consultation time is 5 years too late
1158 hours, (unnamed): pricing models must be thought-about. Software-based pricing can also be attainable as long as it is transient. Pricing models can be utilized to offset potential losses so long as the web neutrality is just not violated.
1156hrs, Karthik, Cochin Consulting: In question three, TSPs are supported at an angle. They are overloaded. So far as OTT's operations are concerned, Google invested in Japanese marine cables last yr. Google is predicated on this anticipated revenue that’s positioned on infrastructure. We noticed this on a big scale with Google, we will additionally take a look at this on a smaller scale
Abhishek Agarwal, BSNL: Indian TSPs have made a 1 % profit at their greatest. Bandwidth hungry OTT purposes imply I want to improve my hardware to take care of demand. OTTs require bandwidth to take part in investments. The OTT enterprise has grown enormously, but TSP's turnover is falling. This additionally consists of the revenue of the Indian government, which has additionally declined. All this flows to OTT.
1151hrs, Sunil Gupta, TRAI: I ask individuals to think about several types of OTT providers, hungry bandwidth or hungry assets, or we’ll attempt to exchange this with pricing TSP, this can scale back consumption. That is the question we need to remark on.
1149, Bharat Bhat: OTT invests in numerous matters from TSP. But they are nonetheless investing. Wifi hotspots, for instance, TSPs don’t make investments in this. All you need is a knowledge tube. This isn’t by means of a knowledge network. All you must do is join to a knowledge middle. It isn’t a query of whether or not OTT
1144hrs, Bhattacharya, BIF penetrating into the telecommunication service area, is a false impression concerning the licensing of the imbalance that I feel is. The providers will not be the identical. Operators have already invested heavily within the network. Even in 2015, they have been bleeding and created a tone and weep. OTT undoubtedly guides the growth of data, which is why TSP has to construct a community. It develops slightly symbiotic than a competitor. TSP continues to watch knowledge pricing. If OTT clears the info on the community, you’ll be able to nonetheless increase the worth as a TSP. TSPs can't do it in the present day because of a hyper competitors if I can. Demand for knowledge continues to be explosive. TSPs continue to spend money on infrastructure. Another level I made in my comments – OTTs can’t be referred to as OTT. They make a big contribution to infrastructure. EUR 75 billion per yr. And it is of their pursuits.
1144hrs, (nameless): There could also be an understanding between OTT and TSP that results in discriminatory pricing and never ever be allowed.
1142hrs, Amrita Chaudhary: If I take a look at license variations, we have now to see fees. Some are certified, however they have to be even more pleasant. It isn’t something else that damages license charges, however the present system that not works now.
1141hrs, Uppal: I see an argument, however the concern of sensitivity associated with a new player on the market is just not OTT
1140, RS Sharma: The question is whether or not OTT's revenue comes from investments on behalf of telecommunications corporations.
1135hrs, Mahesh Uppal: The start line here is the problem. Investments in this area are really massive. The debt of the actors is proof of this. Right now, all community operators are upgrading to 4g to compete with Jio. Invalid to say that it damages funding. The strain on the telescope, documented all over the place, truly affects pricing. The economics of this sector isn’t an obstacle for OTT, but a new competitor who performs totally different guidelines. Now that the tracks declare that this is related to OTT, I don't assume they’re. The second query is disappointment because we will ask the whole ecosystem. Why distinguish OTT? If something, most telcos acknowledge that their service – knowledge – would not be in demand with out OTT platforms. What works online? Demand for OTT feed. One OTT service supplier advised me that the problem was that if he withdraws, the TSPs will lose their revenue on the idea of utilization. We now have to see that OTTs are average, they are stakeholders in the identical business, seeing that they are damaging to investments.
The next question to be discussed:
Q.three Has regulatory or licensing imbalance affected infusion investments in telecommunication networks, that are wanted now and again to increase network capacity and improve know-how? If yes, how can OTT suppliers participate in funding in telecommunications networks?
1131hrs, Mahesh Uppal: As part of the TRAI Act, the TRAI Act is answerable for the right progress of the business. It’s necessary to determine modifications in the area. We transfer in the direction of higher efficiency. We should always not go back to something. Previously, the SMS was separated from the pager. It mirrored the same debate as immediately. The textual content message was not blocked for paging. We should always use the same lens in this substitutability.
1129hrs, Bharat Bhat: Although we assume that they provide comparable providers. At this time, if I’m going from place to put, I can take a automotive or a taxi. However I can even fly from point A to level B. Ought to the same regulation apply to flying because the street? These two will not be totally different, though they serve the identical want. Two providers require a special regulatory system. You want one, however the Privacy Act already exists, privacy laws are being thought-about, they hopefully coated the required rules for OTT.
1123hrs, Vinay Kesari, Setu: Gupta talked concerning the extent of this consultation. I want to respect the particular features of this session. The first query considerations the discount of consultation. The very fact is that in the shopper market, there are three heads on which they charge shoppers: knowledge, voice and text messages. These are the one real telco providers. Regulatory buildings can confuse things. Nevertheless, the market is shifting quick and it isn’t a lie. In the present day, Telcos is charging extra info at present, no change. The question of substitutability is troublesome. They’re definitely indirectly substitutable. The regulatory structure should stay a check of time. Are these providers usually substitutable? The reply is yes. The very fact is that SMS is just for occasion messages. Personal communication is at Whatsapp. Most present telco plans don’t charge for voice. The knowledge is now Telco's actual service. Immediately, voice and textual content messages are nonetheless on phones. At this time everyone is shifting within the course of VoLTE. SMS evolves into numerous IP-based providers. Even nuclear know-how providers are provided with the OTT-like QoS element. They are typically substitutable. Nevertheless, ought to they be regulated in the same approach? I do not assume so. We need to scale back the regulatory burden on the axles. The service they offer is superior. The market has progressed. We need to take a look at new regulatory mechanisms. Innovation can’t be killed. Question eight has the identical answer, the particular circumstances relevant to OTT, we don’t want to take a look at communication as an entire, whatever the instrument. Medium tends to seek info. We’d like to consider the primary rules in comparison to the prevailing regulatory buildings.
1119hrs, Sanjeev Varma, Reliance Jio: There has been a sea change in OTT providers. They will innovate because of the appliance layer. Nevertheless, progress has additionally taken place in communications, with a focus here. Sure OTTs are liable for users of TSPs. We want to emphasize that useful substitutability ought to be checked out and in addition from the demand aspect of the buyer. As a shopper, I can use OTT and TSP. Operationally comparable and demand-side substitutable providers ought to be thought-about in the context of regulation.
Defines that the EU definition describes communication providers nicely. VoIP, video call, text and file switch might be thought-about functionally just like TSP providers. An OTT service that permits 1 to 1 or 1 multiple communications must be thought-about equivalent. Referring to Questions 7 and eight, we advocate the identical as in 2015 – a minimalist mild touch management for OTT, but nationwide security exceptions. We consider OTTs need a strong progress model. Nevertheless, obligatory restrictions on knowledge safety and nationwide safety also needs to be respected for the OTT and the TSP.
1116 hours, Karthik, Cochin Consulting: The financial purpose why they shouldn’t be equated: I used to be concerned in dealing with Hike earlier. And we questioned if we have been going to manage. The regulator definitely doesn’t need to be fearful of competitors, but local actors can endure. If we speak about regulation of communications corporations, self-regulation mechanisms might be set up. There are different mechanisms that may work
1105hrs, Sunil Gupta, TRAI panel: Paper questions have been raised, however they are based mostly on some type of grounding. The identical service has an actual question, the same guidelines. The primary question asks which providers, when offered by the OTT, ought to be regulated. No * all * OTT providers. Sure or no, you. Nevertheless, there are some considerations that some providers have on different providers.
Shashikant, Keizer Techniques: Many OTT platforms at present present cost channels. With the assistance of OTT, they’re obtainable on-line. My request is that the cost channels also needs to be billed. We lose revenue on this regard.
1107 Ritesh Khosla, sony: I’ve no totally different arguments that the previous ones are convincing. Nevertheless, I have the equivalence of the tactic behind these questions. In case you are an electrical supplier and gear. Units use electricity, don’t compete with the service supplier. If followers might flip to electricity, we name them rivals? I feel it is absurd. Within the case of OTT, that is true. OTT colour could be very vast. Each product has its own definition. With some OTT, you can also make calls and declare to compete with TSPs, and that is the fallacious place. Abhishek rightly identified that these issues can’t be brought up with utterly totally different techniques.
The formulation of Abhishek Malhotra, TMT Case Regulation 12 78 is the start line for the existence of substitutability. When investigating this problem, if it seems that there’s a question of substitutability. However there’s already a speculation. For questions 7 and 8, this has already been stated, I simply need to say that the relevant laws already exists. The federal government earlier, when asked to answer the question of the OTT regulation, stated very categorically that the OTTs are
1053hrs Mahesh Uppal: This matter has turn out to be meaningless in recent times. I previously talked about to you that we should always perhaps speak to the useful regulation. Now things have modified. At this time, the ISP is especially an Internet service supplier and not a phone service provider. Telephone know-how is essentially free. Telephony know-how is used more in rural areas – by definition, OTT cannot be used. Subsequently, these two are usually not substitutable. We all know that we can’t survive via OTT communication alone. These usually are not telecommunication connections. Connect us to different subscribers. TSP is the only method to hook up with individuals outdoors the subscriber. In such a case, I can’t call utilizing the OTT. They don’t seem to be substitutable. There are also legislative modifications. Telecom licenses can be found from the shelf. There isn’t any spectrum, however I could be a telecom operator. Additionally, the OTT won’t enter the market. If ten years ago it was meant to regulate who might come or depart, both parties might freely enter each other's markets. Regulation shouldn’t do one thing that the market itself can do. Alternative shouldn’t happen here. We speak about a slender service package deal – OTT and TSP. Alternative would substitute SIM cards or OTT providers.
We’ve to see that we use substitutability in its roughest type with none precision. There isn’t a question of a degree enjoying area, because what is just not equal cannot be equated. We’re in several ways, so we can’t regulate in the same approach. Bhat mentioned these differences. There’s a qualitative distinction between PSTN communication service providers and people who are usually not. This can be a helpful distinction and we will build a coherent regulatory framework. I don’t assume it is about changing these rules. We have now the whole system to manage OTT by way of IT regulation. And a system that regulates TSP by way of the Telegraph Act. And this can be a poorly argued position that these are the same as a result of some options are widespread. It is necessary that they don’t seem to be groomed. Nevertheless, this does not imply that the TSP's working circumstances are satisfactory. They face obstacles when it comes to charges and rights. These standards have modified internationally. All that we name licenses has been virtually automated licenses. Funds are simply admin costs, and practically no charge is required. This should occur. Nevertheless, we should always not burden one other business for this function. A lot of the issues on this article, I'm sorry, usually are not the actual issues in most regulatory techniques.
(Inaudible) Bhattacharya, BIF: Primarily, OTT providers are dependent on TSP, but not vice versa. OTT appears to be a misunderstanding, it gives the impression that they’re free riders. They’re, in reality, the drivers of demand for knowledge name, especially right here you possibly can see the evidence. They are also some of the essential elements in the enlargement of the digital infrastructure community. We’ll come to see if they should be referred to as OTT, we at BIF consider they need to be referred to as digital service providers. They are themselves answerable for the infrastructure to get content material for the buyer. They convey content material to the edge of the community. They spend money on cables, knowledge facilities and infrastructure to accomplish this. Evaluation Mason has prepared a report that mentions an infrastructure value EUR 75 billion a yr. They don’t seem to be free riders
India is a vital OTT market. The market has grown five occasions over three years. Highest downloads in 2015. By 2020, it’s the greatest video market. Rural India has 60% of the market and plays an enormous position in OTT consumption. The buyer is concerned in OTT providers. They’re additionally helpful for the tent, resulting in demand for knowledge. OTT builds value for everybody in the worth chain, so why are we complaining?
Alternative must talk about each methods. We have now to think about whether the know-how works on the similar degree – not. OTTs supply wealthy interactive providers, not just communication and TSPs, three, you possibly can only use OTT on digital units, and you should use telecommunication providers from quite a lot of units. And we additionally want to know how they stay – OTTs depend on TSP. OTTs cannot be offered with out bodily access to TSPs. TSPs management infrastructure – OTTS can’t present providers without this. TSP licenses additionally grant unique rights – the suitable to accumulate frequencies, numbering assets, interconnection rights – these are usually not obtainable to OTT. OTTs function in a competitive market, simpler to vary shoppers, this isn’t the case with TSP. The selection of change is rather more troublesome on TSP. OTT doesn’t have unique rights – if it needs to offer comparable providers to TSP, a special license is required. OTTs supply quite a lot of providers that can be tertiary to different providers – communications and calls is usually a recreation editor in addition to the sport – this doesn’t exchange the TSP calling service. We create an impractical distinction here. My last point, OTT, gives a variety of providers. It is rather clear that OTTs are totally different from TSP. Finally, the Telegraph Act doesn’t apply to OTT – they don’t personal telegraph. TRAI itself has outlined OTT that they do not personal or use the community. There isn’t any purpose to make them just like TSPs, so we don’t assume they must be regulated underneath the Telecommunications Act.
The primary difference here is interoperability. The connection to PMLN / PSTN is just not in OTT providers. The question of whether interoperability ought to be ensured must be mentioned. OTT can’t substitute these that can’t be changed
1035hrs: Bharat Bhat. India's IT Foundation: Most OTTS providers supply a special service than TSPs, and should you take a look at the legacy of the network, OTT providers are at a better degree and don't go to the core of the network. It’s essential to see providers based mostly on numbers compared to those who are or are usually not. OTTs use numbers once for evaluate. After that, the telephone quantity used for authentication is not related.
For those who take a look at e-mail as a second instance, two individuals will proceed to communicate and remain OTT. Cellular providers, for instance, differ from the older PSTN service. OTT has no power in the network. It's really like some other Internet service. Many OTTs exist to realize alternativity. They are at a special degree and do not substitute them with a cellular service. For instance of how straightforward it is to vary service providers, it has already been proven
1032hrs: Amrita Chaudhary, CCAOI, brings the lacking value between service providers between OTT and TSP from the viewpoint of shoppers. He then raises the query of a degree enjoying subject and states that totally different providers can’t be compared in this respect. Next, he says that there are already provisions within the OTT regulation that primarily concern IT regulation and already cowl OTT providers. The political decision-making process on these fronts ought to be determined first, as progress can be fallacious in this case
1030hrs: Bajpai presents the relevant inquiries to Group 1. The primary two questions:
Q.1 The service (s) offered by the OTT service supplier or service suppliers ought to be thought-about the identical or just like the providers provided by TSP. Listing all such OTT providers and their descriptions for the providers offered by TSP.
Q.2 Should substitutability be thought-about as a main criterion for evaluating regulatory or licensing guidelines relevant to TSPs and OTT providers? Please provide the elements or issues and arguments that ought to be taken under consideration in determining and clarifying substitution
1025hrs: Sunil Bajpai factors out that 89 comments have been acquired and 12 responses. Question 1 considerations the regulatory framework for OTT providers
1025hrs: Opening remarks by RS Sharma confer with issues raised after earlier consultations at the OTT listening to in 2018.