OTT Regulation in India: A Comprehensive Overview
Share your feedback and comments with us at firstname.lastname@example.org
On July 7, 2023, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) unveiled a consultation document titled "Regulatory Mechanism for OTT Communication Services, and Selective Banning of OTT Services."
Definition of OTT
In India's regulatory landscape, the term "Over-the-Top (OTT) services" is contentious and lacks a universally accepted definition, causing confusion for potential regulation. However, TRAI has referred to definitions from international bodies, describing OTT services as those provided over the internet or on top of existing data networks.
The definition employed by TRAI in its Consultation Paper on Regulatory Framework for Over-The-Top (OTT) Communication Services dated November 12, 2018, is as follows:
"OTT communication services (e.g., VoIP) offer real-time person-to-person telecommunication services that utilize the network infrastructure of the telecommunication service provider and compete with them.”
Further, the definition utilized by the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) committee on Net Neutrality is as follows:
"These services (e.g., VoIP) provide real-time person-to-person telecommunication services. These services are like the telecommunication services provided by licensed telecom service providers (TSPs) but are delivered to users as applications carried over the internet using the network infrastructure of TSPs. Essentially, OTT communication services compete with the services provided by TSPs, operating on the infrastructure established by TSPs."
It is important to note that OTT services encompass various categories like Communication Services, Media and Entertainment Services, Gaming Services, Cloud services, and more. These definitions underline the technical distinctions between OTT service providers and Telecommunication Service Providers (TSPs).
Distinction between TSPs and OTTs
Telecom Service Providers (TSPs) and Over-The-Top (OTT) services represent two distinct components within the telecommunications landscape, each playing unique roles with interdependencies.
TSPs serve as the backbone of the telecommunications infrastructure, providing internet access and managing the network layer, including critical resources like spectrum. OTT services, on the other hand, operate exclusively in the application layer, offering various services over the open internet without the need for spectrum or direct network access.
Attempting to subject TSPs and OTT services to the same licensing framework is problematic due to their fundamentally different functions and dependencies. TSPs primarily offer data transmission and internet connectivity, acting as gatekeepers of the internet, while OTT services are oriented towards content creation, application development, and data generation, relying on TSPs' foundational infrastructure for user access.
Moreover, TSPs hold exclusive rights, including spectrum allocation, numbering resources, and rights of way, justified by their significant investments in network infrastructure, whereas OTT services lack such privileges and predominantly operate within the application layer. Recognizing these distinctions is essential to create a regulatory framework that effectively addresses the complexities of the telecommunications ecosystem.
Current Regulatory Framework of OTTs
The present regulatory framework governing OTT (Over-The-Top) service providers is established under the Information Technology Act of 2000. This framework includes various rules and regulations, such as the Information Technology (Reasonable Security Practices and Procedures and Sensitive Personal Data or Information) Rules of 2011, the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Interception, Monitoring and Decryption of Information) Rules of 2009, the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public) Rules of 2009, the Information Technology (the Indian Computer Emergency Response Team and Manner of Performing Functions and Duties) Rules of 2013, CERT-In Directions issued in April 2022, and the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules of 2021. These regulations encompass critical aspects, such as data privacy, security practices, information interception, monitoring, decryption, public access blocking, cybersecurity, intermediary guidelines, and digital media ethics.
Moreover, OTT Communication Services, which include messaging through voice, video, or text between terminals, are already regulated under the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, and fall under the Unified License (UL). Consequently, any service provider primarily offering such services, including OTT providers, should comply with the Act and UL regulations.
Recent legislative developments, such as the Consumer Protection Act of 2019 and the Consumer Protection (E-commerce) Rules of 2020, have also contributed to the regulatory landscape concerning OTT services. The upcoming enactment of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act in 2023, along with the proposed Digital India Act, will further strengthen this regulatory framework.
The rationale for refraining from introducing supplementary regulations, notably in the form of telecommunications licensing, stems from the comprehensiveness of the existing framework. The introduction of such additional regulations could result in unnecessary redundancy, create uncertainty in the business environment, and potentially impede innovation and economic progress.
It is essential to recognize that traditional justifications for licensing, which primarily involve managing limited resources, do not apply to OTTs. OTTs function as internet-based applications independently of resource constraints. Concerns related to competition, consumer protection, and data privacy can effectively be addressed through existing sector-specific laws and regulatory bodies.
The Competition Commission of India (CCI) shares the perspective that crafting a separate regulatory framework for OTTs is redundant and could hinder technological advancement. Therefore, it advocates for avoiding excessive regulation in this domain.
In conclusion, the current regulatory framework governing OTT services is comprehensive and adaptable to evolving requirements. Proposing additional regulations like those applied to telecommunications is not justified in this context and may lead to redundancy, ambiguity, and obstacles to innovation. Existing legislation and regulatory bodies are well-equipped to address pertinent concerns related to accountability, competition, consumer protection, and data privacy within the dynamic realm of OTT services.
Viewpoints of Various Stakeholders involved
Telecom Service Providers (TSPs):
Telecom Service Providers (TSPs) present a compelling argument for the implementation of licensing and network usage fees. Their primary points include:
Infrastructure Investment: TSPs have made substantial investments in building and maintaining the telecommunications infrastructure. Licensing fees can help recover these significant capital expenditures. TSPs argue that the licensing fees are essential for ensuring the continued development and maintenance of robust network infrastructure, including the expansion of networks to underserved areas.
Spectrum Costs: Acquiring spectrum licenses is a costly endeavour for TSPs. Licensing fees serve as a means for the government to allocate this limited and valuable resource while generating revenue to support various government initiatives and services.
Fair Competition: TSPs believe that licensing fees create a level playing field in the telecommunications industry. By imposing fees on all players, including Over-The-Top (OTT) services, fairness is ensured as everyone contributes to the costs of regulation, oversight, and infrastructure development.
Quality of Service: Licensing fees can be linked to network quality and performance standards. TSPs argue that by implementing fees tied to network usage, they are incentivized to maintain and enhance the quality of their services, resulting in better experiences for consumers.
Regulatory Framework: Licensing fees are integral to the regulatory framework that ensures compliance with industry standards and consumer protection measures. They enable regulatory authorities to enforce rules and regulations, fostering trust in the telecommunications sector.
Network Expansion: TSPs argue that revenue generated through licensing and network usage fees can be reinvested in expanding and improving network coverage, especially in rural and remote areas, thereby bridging the digital divide and providing connectivity to underserved populations.
In summary, TSPs advocate for licensing and network usage fees as essential components of a fair and sustainable telecommunications ecosystem. These fees serve various purposes, including infrastructure development, spectrum management, regulatory compliance, and revenue generation for public welfare, ultimately contributing to the growth and accessibility of telecommunications services.
Over-The-Top (OTT) service providers:
OTT service providers present a range of arguments against the imposition of licensing and network usage fees. Their primary points include:
Innovation and Competition: OTTs argue that imposing fees on their services could stifle innovation and competition in the digital space. They contend that their ability to offer new and diverse services has led to a more competitive and dynamic market, benefiting consumers with a wider range of choices.
No Dependency on Network Infrastructure: Unlike Telecom Service Providers (TSPs), OTTs do not own or operate physical network infrastructure. They argue that they rely on existing internet infrastructure provided by TSPs and do not create additional strain on the network. Therefore, they believe it is unfair to impose the same fees on them as on TSPs.
User Choice: OTTs emphasize that their services are chosen by users who willingly download and use their applications. Users often opt for OTT services due to their flexibility, convenience, and often lower costs compared to traditional telecom services. Imposing fees on OTTs could limit users' choices and preferences.
Consumer Benefits: OTTs argue that their services have led to lower costs for consumers, especially in the case of international calls and messaging. Imposing fees on OTTs could result in increased costs for users, reducing the affordability and accessibility of digital communication.
Overlapping Regulation: OTTs point out that they are already subject to various regulations, including data privacy laws and content regulations. They contend that imposing additional fees on top of existing regulations could create a complex and burdensome regulatory environment.
Economic Growth: OTTs argue that their services have contributed to economic growth by providing opportunities for small businesses and entrepreneurs to reach a global audience. Imposing fees could hinder these opportunities and economic benefits.
User Data Protection: OTTs often highlight their commitment to user data protection and privacy. They argue that additional fees could divert resources away from important privacy and security measures.
In summary, OTTs advocate against licensing and network usage fees, emphasizing their role in fostering innovation, competition, and consumer choice. They argue that such fees could hinder their ability to provide affordable and diverse services while creating regulatory complexities in an already well-regulated industry.
Detrimental Impact on Startups:
The imposition of licensing and network usage fees on startups in the digital space can have several detrimental impacts:
Financial Strain: Startups typically operate with limited financial resources, and imposing fees can create a significant financial burden. These fees can divert funds away from product development, marketing, and expansion efforts, potentially hindering a startup's growth prospects.
Entry Barriers: Licensing and usage fees can act as entry barriers for new startups, making it more difficult for innovative companies to enter the market. This reduces competition and can result in a less dynamic and innovative digital ecosystem.
Innovation Inhibition: Startups are often at the forefront of technological innovation. The imposition of fees can discourage experimentation and the development of new services and solutions, as startups may be less willing to take risks due to increased operating costs.
Reduced User Choice: Startups often introduce novel and disruptive services that expand consumer choices. Fees can limit the ability of startups to offer cost-effective alternatives to traditional services, reducing the diversity of options available to consumers.
Unfair Competitive Landscape: Established players with deeper pockets may find it easier to absorb the costs associated with licensing and usage fees. This can create an uneven playing field, where startups face a competitive disadvantage against larger, well-funded competitors.
Market Concentration: The financial burden of fees can force startups to seek acquisition or partnership with larger companies, potentially leading to market consolidation. This concentration of power can reduce competition and innovation.
Dampened Entrepreneurial Spirit: Fees can discourage entrepreneurship, as potential founders may perceive the digital space as less accessible and more costly to enter. This can result in a loss of talent and ideas in the startup ecosystem.
Global Competitiveness: If startups in one region face significant fees, they may be less competitive on a global scale. This can limit the ability of a country or region to foster a thriving digital economy and participate in the global digital marketplace.
Thus, licensing and network usage fees can pose substantial challenges to startups, hindering their growth, innovation, and competitiveness. Policymakers often need to strike a balance between regulating the digital space and fostering an environment conducive to the development and success of startups.
ADIF's thoughtful perspective on the regulation of Over-The-Top (OTT) services underscores the need for a balanced and nuanced approach that respects the dynamics of data consumption, recognizes operational disparities between Telecom Service Providers (TSPs) and OTT services, and upholds the crucial principles of net neutrality. Their vision for a digital India envisions an environment where innovation thrives, accessibility is ensured, and all stakeholders benefit, promoting a dynamic and equitable digital future.
Thanks for reading ADIF! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support our work.