Net Neutrality: Grey Areas in the Internet Economy

This reading list compiles articles on net neutrality in India, taking into account both political and economic ramifications of a truly open internet.

 

In the USA, on 14 December 2017, the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Republican majority approved Chairman Ajit Pai’s plan to gut the net neutrality protections. In India, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) has ruled to prohibit internet service providers from charging discriminatory tariffs based on content. Such a decision by the TRAI ensures that Internet Service Providers will treat all data on the internet the same, and not discriminate or charge differently by user, content, website, platform, application, type of attached equipment, or method of communication.

How does net neutrality affect the internet user base in India? In what ways does neutrality affect the economics of the internet in terms of market structure, sustainability of good networks, impact of neutrality on consumer,and investment in network infrastructure?

This reading list compiles articles on net neutrality in India, taking into account both political and economic ramifications of a truly open internet.

A 2016 EPW editorial argues that even as TRAI, through its “Explanatory Memorandum,” has recognised that the internet has a substantial amount of user-generated content and is an “amalgamation of networks,” it has not explicitly recognised that the internet is a public good, indeed a global public entity, that belongs to no one and yet to everyone.

 

 

Shobhna Kunwar, in 2015, wrote about how the economics of neutrality is ambivalent as opposed to the notions in politics. If seen from an economic perspective, the benefits and deleterious effects of neutrality principle need to be seen in different contexts. This is because the effects can be ambiguous. The article deals with three aspects highlighting those grey areas and are an antidote to the clear notions of politics. These are dealt under three headings: (i) market structure issues; (ii) sustainability question in net neutrality; and (iii) effects of neutrality on consumers and investment in network expansion.

 

 

In this 2015 article, Vinod Kumar argued that a lot of the debate over neutrality today is really a debate against monopolistic practices. Monopolies are not desirable and any policies that help strengthen monopolistic practices should invite protest. However, differential pricing is not one of the policies that facilitate the creation of monopolies.

 

 

In 2014, Rohit Prasad and V Sridhar summarised regulatory views on net neutrality in the advanced countries such as the United States and the European Union contrasting them with possibilities in emerging countries such as India.

 

 

In 2015, Rohit Prasad and V Sridhar wrote

Since the controversial term “net neutrality” was coined by Tim Wu of Columbia Law School in 2003, much of the debates on net neutrality have revolved around the potential actions of network owners (that is, telecom/internet service providers—TISPs) exercising additional control over the data traffic in their networks. Presently the obvious villains in the show are the TISPs as they provide the last mile bandwidth to carry content and applications provided by the popularly known “over the top” (OTT) players to the end users. Net neutrality is a specific approach to the economic regulation of the internet. It is based on the premise of the “end to end design principle” in which traffic on the internet should be determined by decisions at the edges of the network. The two sides that are on the edges of the network include the OTTs and the end users. The TISPs that provide connectivity should play the role of a “dumb pipe.” 

They argue that the internet can no longer be thought of as a simple two-sided market with the TISPs as the bottleneck monopoly between the OTTs and the end user and that net neutrality in the present context is a dogma whose time has passed. They suggest a new credo—digital dynamism—that needs to take its place. 

 

 

 

The Grid

Whatever be the policy instrument through which we adopt the principle of net neutrality, India’s de-facto position on this will emerge only as we begin to see new services and business models tested...
A recent report in the Indian Express states that an inter-ministerial task force has counted up to 53,236 people involved in manual scavenging in India, a four-fold rise from the 13,000-odd such...
A new sociological imagination is needed to capture the totality of the social world of the village and beyond, the rapidly changing relationship between caste and class (and power), and especially...
The Peoples Democratic Party and the Bharatiya Janata Party coalition government in Jammu and Kashmir has been marred by doublespeak and U-turns vis-à-vis its poll/alliance mandate, gross human...
In this conversation, Nancy Fraser explains how the left's agenda of social justice was hijacked by what she calls “progressive neo-liberalism,” while exploring how a nuanced Marxist political...
This analysis of electoral data from the Karnataka Chief Electoral Officer’s website and the single-person household estimates from the Centre for Research and Debates in Development Policy, New...
What were the inflection points in the early history of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS)? 
Studies on sexual harassment complaint committees over the years highlight how committees, even when instituted, often do not function as they should. 
Back to Top