If you need any help...

To Flipkart, Google, Microsoft and Cleartrip, You've been invited to depose before the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Net Neutrality, according to a notice on the Standing Committee website [http://164.100.47.134/lsscommittee/Information%20Technology/Meeting_notice/Notice%20-%20(24)%2011.08.15.pdf] (via @ianuragthakur [https://twitter.com/ianuragthakur/status/629539338083119105]). We, at Savetheinternet.in [http://www.savetheinternet.in], would strongly urge you to take a stand in favour

07 August, 2015
2 min read

To Flipkart, Google, Microsoft and Cleartrip,

You've been invited to depose before the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Net Neutrality, according to a notice on the Standing Committee website (via @ianuragthakur).

We, at Savetheinternet.in, would strongly urge you to take a stand in favour of Net Neutrality: against any form of discrimination by access providers, whether in terms of speed, availability or price of access to specific sites.

We can help

At SaveTheInternet.in, we've worked on this issue since March 29th 2015, and have made submissions to the TRAI, the DoT and the Parliamentary Standing Committee at both individual and group levels.

We have inputs to offer, in terms of data, points of view, points of argument, examples of violation of Net Neutrality, and the issues with it from multiple points of view: business, legal, diversity, openness and plurality. We also have (financial) data and policy points that address the fallacious claim from telecom operators that "Same Service Same Rules" applies to VoIP and messaging, and that Zero rating is going to help improve access.

A gentle reminder

Two of you - Flipkart and Cleartrip - have publicly stated that you support Net Neutrality. Microsoft has supported Net Neutrality in its TRAI submission too.

We'd like to remind you that the proceedings of Parliamentary Standing Committee are confidential only until the standing committee releases its report on Net Neutrality. Your depositions will eventually be public, and we hope that you will stay true to your word.

Areas of focus

Remember that Facebook has also been asked to depose along with you, and they are likely to make a strong case in favor of Zero Rating.

Based on the DoT report, and our interactions with those involved in policy, we believe that there are a few things that people still remain confused about. These are, and you should address them:

1. That telecom operators are losing money and need to license VoIP and paid prioritization to survive. <a href=https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1_Ql2qgMJEmB-wiFZ6eO-Rh9AXaRGLeRLQnd7Bb76dQU/edit#slide=id.ga43db4c83_0_84 target=_blank>This presentation should help address that.

2. That there is no universal definition of Net Neutrality, and more importantly, the confusion that Net Neutrality is about non-discrimination between consumers, instead of being about non-discrimination between websites and apps. Please make sure you make that clear. This definition should help.

3. That the Internet industry supports Zero Rating. It doesn't and neither should you. Here's a letter signed by 457 startups, and it specifically mentions that Zero Rating is harmful.

Some documents for you to refer to, if it helps:

  1. Legal expert submission from SaveTheInternet.in, here
  2. Business and startup ecosystem centred submission from MediaNama, here.

In case you need any help, please feel free to get in touch with us. Some of us are named here.

As long as we're on the same side, we're there to help.

Subscribe to our newsletter, and don't miss out on our latest updates.

Similar Posts

1
Delhi High Court directs government to submit affidavit confirming lack of written records in Aarogya Setu’s development

Updates on Saurav Das’ writ petition before the Delhi High Court, where he is contesting the Central Information Commission’s decision to withhold information related to Aarogya Setu.

4 min read

2
Supreme Court refers challenge to constitutionality of sedition law to a larger Bench of at least 5 judges

Noting that the past cases under Section 124-A will not be affected on account of introduction of new Bills, a 3-judges bench of the Supreme Court led by the CJI has referred the petition challenging the constitutionality of Section 124-A to a larger Bench of at least 5 judges

5 min read

3
Shooting down bad ideas: Our response to TRAI’s consultation paper on OTT Regulation and Selective Banning

TRAI released a consultation paper on OTT regulation and selective banning. In our response, we expressed our view against the licensing and registration as well as selective banning of OTT communication services. See the post to read our detailed comments.

5 min read

Donate to IFF

Help IFF scale up by making a donation for digital rights. Really, when it comes to free speech online, digital privacy, net neutrality and innovation — we got your back!