---
abstract: |
  A report by India's telecom department raises hackles over fears that
  services like WhatsApp will no longer be free.
archive-url: "https://web.archive.org/web/20230816132257/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-33605253"
author:
- Pranesh Prakash
authors:
- Pranesh Prakash
categories:
- Net neutrality
- Internet governance
citation:
  abstract: A report by India's telecom department raises hackles over
    fears that services like WhatsApp will no longer be free.
  accessed: 2019-01-12
  archive: "https://web.archive.org/web/20230816132257/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-33605253"
  author: Pranesh Prakash
  available-date:
    date-parts:
    - - 2015
      - 7
      - 25
    iso-8601: 2015-07-25
    literal: 2015-07-25
    raw: 2015-07-25
  citation-key: prakashWillIndians2015
  container-title: BBC
  issued:
    date-parts:
    - - 2015
      - 7
      - 25
    iso-8601: 2015-07-25
    literal: 2015-07-25
    raw: 2015-07-25
  language: en-GB
  license: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0
    International License (CC-BY-NC-SA)
  section: India
  source: www.bbc.com
  title: Will Indians have to pay for WhatsApp?
  type: article-newspaper
  URL: "https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-33605253"
comments:
  hypothesis:
    theme: clean
date: 2015-07-25
engines:
- path: /opt/quarto/share/extension-subtrees/julia-engine/\_extensions/julia-engine/julia-engine.js
license:
  text: CC BY-NC 4.0
  type: creative-commons
  url: "https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/"
listing-page: ../press.html
original-url: "https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-33605253"
publication: BBC
title: Will Indians have to pay for WhatsApp?
title-block-categories: true
toc-title: Table of contents
---

# Will Indians have to pay for WhatsApp?

------------------------------------------------------------------------

India's Department of Telecommunications (DoT) [formed a
panel](http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2015-01-24/news/58408287_1_consultation-paper-viber-skype){rel="noopener noreferrer"}
in January 2015 to look into net neutrality in the country.

Net neutrality means service providers should treat all traffic equally.
Users should be able to access all websites at the same speed and cost.

A battle to decide the future of the internet in India is being fought
online, between telecom users and operators.

The panel has now released its
[report](http://www.dot.gov.in/sites/default/files/u68/Net_Neutrality_Committee_report.pdf){rel="noopener noreferrer"}
to the public and invited comments. Pranesh Prakash from the Centre for
Internet Studies decodes the report and what it means for Indians.

## What does the panel say?

- Internet-based Over-the-top (OTT) communication services like
  WhatsApp, Viber, and the like are currently taking advantage of
  "regulatory arbitrage", meaning that the regulations that apply to
  non-Internet based communications services (telephone calls) are
  different from OTT communications services.
- Under current rules, the OTT services don't have to get a licence from
  the government, don't have to abide by anti-spam, do-not-disturb
  regulations, share any revenue with the government or abide by
  national security conditions. The panel wants to bring these services
  under a licensing regime.
- The report distinguishes between Internet-based voice calls (voice
  over IP, or VoIP) and messaging services and doesn't wish to interfere
  with the latter. This means it could regulate services like Skype,
  Viber and WhatsApp calls but not WhatsApp or Viber messages. It also
  distinguishes between domestic and international VoIP calls, and
  believes only the former need regulation. It is unclear on what basis
  these distinctions are made.
- The core principles of net neutrality - which are undefined in the
  report, though definitions proposed in submissions they've received
  are quoted - should be adhered to. In the long-run, these should find
  place in a new law, but for the time being they can be enforced
  through the licence agreement between the government and telecom
  providers.

## Where does the panel report go wrong?

WhatsApp and similar services charging depends on what kinds of
regulations are placed on them, and if any costs are imposed on them.

- The proposal by the panel to regulate VoIP services like Skype or
  Viber is a terrible idea.
- Many important terms are left undefined, and many distinctions that
  the report draws are left unexplained. For instance, it is unclear on
  what regulatory basis the report distinguishes between domestic and
  international VoIP calls or between regulation of messaging services
  and VoIP services.

## Will it increase cost of access to WhatsApp and Viber?

"Zero-rating" is a policy whereby telecoms providers agree not to pass
on the costs of handling the data traffic so that consumers can receive
services for free.

On the one hand, this could decrease the cost of access to WhatsApp and
Viber. But that might not be allowed because free services could harm
competition and distort markets.

Whether this will lead to consumers paying for WhatsApp and similar
services depends on what kinds of regulations are placed on them, and if
any costs are imposed on them.

## Does the report uphold net neutrality?

The report is clear that it strongly endorses the "core principles of
net neutrality".

On the issue of "zero-rating" the panel proposes some sound measures,
saying that there should be a two-part mechanism for ensuring that
"harmful" zero-rating doesn't go through.

First, telecom services need to submit "zero-rating" tariff proposals to
an expert body constituted by telecoms department.

Second, consumers will be able to complain about the harmful usage of
"zero-rating" by any service provider, which may result in a fine.

## Where have people got the report wrong?

The report has not increased charges for domestic calls made via
Internet apps

- There have been reports saying that the panel has recommended
  increased charges for domestic VoIP calls. This is untrue.
- There are reports saying the panel has given the go-ahead for all
  forms of zero-rating. Once again, this is untrue. The panel cites
  instances of zero-rating that aren't discriminatory, violative of net
  neutrality and don't harm competition or distort consumer markets
  (such as zero-rating of all Internet traffic for a limited time
  period). Then it goes on to state that the regulator should not allow
  zero-rating that violates the core principles of net neutrality.

*Pranesh Prakash is policy director at the Centre for Internet and
Society. A longer article he wrote on the panel report [can be accessed
here](http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/clearing-misconceptions-dot-panel-net-neutrality){rel="noopener noreferrer"}.*
