Date : 18/09/2023

Relevance: GS Paper 2- Polity & Governance- Regulation of Digital Media

Keywords: Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), Internet and Mobile Association of India (IAMAI), OTT, TSP

Context-

• In recent months, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) has initiated a discussion regarding the regulation of over-the-top (OTT) communication services. This move has sparked debates and raised questions about the selective banning of popular platforms like WhatsApp, Facebook, and others. Telecom Service Providers (TSPs) are advocating for regulations due to perceived revenue losses, while others argue that such measures may compromise net neutrality.

Background

• Information Technology (Guidelines for Intermediaries and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 pertaining to digital media and OTT platforms introduce a Code of Ethics that applies to both digital media entities and OTT platforms.
• Streaming platforms like Netflix and Amazon Prime are required to categorize their content into five age-based groups: U (universal), 7+, 13+, 16+, and A (adult). Additionally, they must implement effective parental locks for content classified as 13+, and establish a robust age verification system for accessing adult content.
• Digital media publishers delivering news content must adhere to the journalistic conduct norms outlined by the Press Council of India and comply with the Programme Code specified in the Cable Television Networks Regulation Act.
• A comprehensive three-tier grievance redressal mechanism has been established:

1. Level-I: Publishers are expected to engage in self-regulation.
2. Level-II: A self-regulating body, headed by a retired judge from the Supreme Court or High Court or an independent eminent figure, will oversee complaints and concerns.
3. Level-III: The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting will formulate an oversight mechanism and establish an inter-departmental committee responsible for addressing grievances. This body will also possess the authority to censor and block content when necessary.

• But recently, TRAI released a consultation paper inviting responses on the need for a regulatory framework for OTT communication services.
• The paper also touched upon the possibility of selectively banning these services. Stakeholders have submitted their responses, with the deadline being September 1. TRAI is now poised to issue guidelines on whether OTT services should be regulated.

Selective Banning Initiative

• The idea of selectively banning OTT services gained momentum following a notice from a Parliamentary Standing Committee to the Department of Telecom (DoT).
• This call for action was prompted by concerns about the widespread influence and impact of these platforms. It's essential to note that this discussion pertains exclusively to OTT communication services like WhatsApp, Signal, Meta (formerly Facebook), Google Meet, Zoom, and others, not content-based OTTs like Netflix or Amazon Prime.
• Content regulation falls under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB).

Defining OTT and Cost-sharing Proposals

TRAI has also requested stakeholders to provide their definitions of OTT services and proposals for cost-sharing mechanisms between TSPs and OTT services.

The TSP vs. OTT Conflict

• Telecom Service Providers argue that OTTs should be regulated and financially contribute because they rely on the telecom infrastructure developed over the years. Currently, they do not make direct contributions, leading to a decline in telecom companies' revenue streams.
• These platforms offer a wide range of services, from multimedia messaging to voice and video calls, all delivered over the internet. This circumvents the need for traditional telecom services, particularly voice calls and text messages, resulting in a significant drop in revenue for telecom companies.
• According to the Cellular Operators Association of India (COAI), which represents major telecom players like Jio, Airtel, and Vodafone Idea, OTT communication service providers benefit from TSP-funded networks without investing in digital infrastructure for access networks.

The Demand for Fair Share Contribution

• COAI insists on a policy framework that ensures fair contributions from large OTT service providers to telecom network operators. This contribution, based on assessable criteria like subscriber numbers or data usage, would support network expansion and increase government revenue.
• The Internet Service Providers Association of India believes that if OTT services are substitutable for licensed services, they should be subject to the same regulations.
• However, others, such as the Internet and Mobile Association of India (IAMAI), argue against cost-sharing mechanisms that may lead to double charges for consumers and violate the principles of net neutrality, which advocate for equal treatment of all data transmitted over networks.

Arguments for Banning OTT Services

• Proponents of banning OTT services argue that licensed operators should have the authority to selectively block these services if necessary.
• They claim that OTTs can easily obtain customer location data, making access restriction more feasible when services are under license.

Opposition to Selective Banning

• IAMAI and the Broadband India Forum (BIF) are staunchly against the selective banning of OTT services. They argue that existing regulations, such as the IT Act, of 2000, and the Consumer Protection Act, of 2019, provide sufficient oversight.
• Instead of banning, they suggest that OTT providers implement IT solutions to swiftly suspend services during internet outages.

Conclusion

The ongoing debate over the regulation and potential banning of OTT services in India highlights the complex interplay between telecom providers, internet companies, government authorities, and consumer interests. Balancing these concerns while upholding principles like net neutrality remains a significant challenge as India seeks to define its approach to the evolving digital landscape.

Source -The Hindu