parallax background

Net Neutrality

Brand Construct Panel Discusion
May 3, 2014
Made For Each Other- ‘India vs World Economy’
May 4, 2014

I think there is a dichotomy in ‘Net Neutrality’ rising buzz, while all of us would ideally like a net to be free flowing of information with no hindrance by ISP. In an ideal world, the net should be neutral and free to all in a free democratic society. Remember! Net is not a source of income but first as a medium of expression and keeping democratic values intact and therefore it should open and transparent in all respect.

F ree flow of net has to lead to a burgeoning of knowledge economy as brought level playing poor and rich, privileged and less privileged. The Internet has collapsed the world into a small village and perhaps everyone with equal opportunity as far seeking knowledge over. “I think net neutrality is important to make sure network operators don’t discriminate and limit access to services people want to use, especially in countries where most people are online,” the Facebook co-founder said. “For people who are not on the internet though, having some connectivity and some ability to share is always much better than having no ability to connect and share at all. That’s why programs like Internet.org are important and can co-exist with net neutrality regulations.”
This only reiterates my point-of-view on Net Neutrality and striking right chord and balance. However, if you think from a provider point, they may wonder as for why Google and Facebook have made fortune in such a short time, while many of ISP and net providers are still struggling, they may like to take a chunk of the profit pie.

Not to forget, that very model of free internet to all has actually lead to the emergence of such icon and Titan and a world of a Google and likes. Perhaps had, they been not free we would not have seen the face of Facebook. But ISP out of their greed may not understand this basic model and business law and get disgraced to discriminate end consumers.

I magine! You pay extra for surfing outside India or paying to search for Google over other search engine or worst some site purposely slowed down to shit to peer Gr. Site or apps due to the extra fee charged by ISP. ISP may like to give elite service like an HD version of the internet for few service providers over others but then you may like to pay little extra to buy that service like how we do in other walks of life. Perhaps that can be justified, so there is certainly two sides to this story. To put things right and correct it from the base I think :
  • Should have a clear policy
  • TRAI should penalize to ISP not maintaining net neutrality
  • And TRAI should have clear policy draft while giving license to ISP provider with clear clause on neutrality
  • Should the ISP like to provide higher version or more speed, broadband to few service providers over other, say over Amazon to that of Flipkart, it should be purely between ISP and vendor and in way it should impact or effect end consumer
  • The consumer may be well informed should there be any discrepancy between ISP and merchandise or any website and then they have the choice to opt or abandon but in no way, netizen should pay for such services.
  • The Recent backlash against plans by Airtel and Facebook Internet.org has compelled Google to think about its Zero Rating– which basically means{ practice of letting users access select apps free of data charges by striking a deal with telecom operators}. Such concepts have not been well taken at the facet of internet democracy basic tenants- avoiding neutrality. I guess the model conceived by Facebook was wonderful but may not see the face of light.

  • To end this debate, it should be Govt. responsibility to put neutrality as policy guidelines and have clear cut clause set for ISP and merchandise as well option of aberration to make revenue without affecting netizens Let the end user decide and correct should there be flaw in the system or they may even accept it

Comments are closed.