[kictanet] Net Neutrality - A Perspective as a Precursor to tomorrow's WCIT Discussions
Ali Hussein
ali at hussein.me.ke
Mon Nov 12 14:36:59 EAT 2012
Listers
As a followup to my posting on *Africa (and Kenya's?) Position to WCIT,
Dubai, *I thought I would pen some thoughts on Net Neutrality as a way to
get our minds thinking ahead of tomorrow morning's Stakeholders Meeting on
WCIT-12 at the Grand Regency.
According to Wikipedia:-
*Network neutrality* (also *net neutrality*, *Internet neutrality*) is a
principle <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle> that advocates
government regulation of Internet service
providers<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_service_provider>
,[1]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality#cite_note-Information_Week-1>
preventing
ISPs from restricting consumers' access to networks that participate in the
Internet <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet>. Specifically, network
neutrality would prevent restrictions on content, sites, platforms, types
of equipment that may be attached, and modes of communication. Network
owners can't interfere with content, applications, services, and devices of
users' choice and remains open to all users and uses.
Since the early 2000s, advocates of net neutrality and associated rules
have raised concerns about the ability of broadband providers to use their last
mile <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_mile> infrastructure to block
Internet applications and content (e.g. websites, services, and protocols),
and even block out competitors. (The term "net neutrality" didn't come into
popular use until several years later, however.) The possibility of
regulations designed to mandate the neutrality of the Internet has been
subject to fierce debate, especially in the United States.
Neutrality proponents claim that telecom companies seek to impose a tiered
service <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiered_service> model in order to
control the pipeline and thereby remove competition, create artificial
scarcity <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_scarcity>, and oblige
subscribers to buy their otherwise uncompetitive services. Many believe net
neutrality to be primarily important as a preservation of current freedoms.
[5] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality#cite_note-no-tolls-5>
Vinton
Cerf <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinton_Cerf>, considered a "father of
the Internet" and co-inventor of the Internet Protocol, Tim
Berners-Lee<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Berners-Lee>,
creator of the Web, and many others have spoken out in favor of network
neutrality.
Opponents of net neutrality claim that broadband service providers have no
plans to block content or degrade network
performance.[8]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality#cite_note-books.google.com-8>
Despite
this claim, there has been a single case where an Internet service
provider, Comcast, intentionally slowed
peer-to-peer<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer-to-peer> (P2P)
communications.[9]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality#cite_note-9>
Still
other companies have begun to use deep packet
inspection<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_packet_inspection> to
discriminate against P2P, FTP, and online games, instituting a cell-phone
style billing system of
overages<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellphone_overage_charges>,
free-to-telecom "value added" services, and
bundling.[10]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality#cite_note-10>
Critics
of net neutrality also argue that data
discrimination<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_discrimination> of
some kinds, particularly to guarantee quality of
service<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quality_of_service>,
is not problematic, but is actually highly desirable. Bob
Kahn<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Kahn>,
co-inventor of the Internet Protocol, has called the term net neutrality a
"slogan" and states that he opposes establishing it, but he admits that he
is against the fragmentation of the net whenever this becomes excluding to
other participants.[11]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality#cite_note-kahn-vid-11>
Opponents
of net neutrality regulation also argue that the best solution to
discrimination by broadband providers is to encourage greater competition
among such providers, which is currently limited in many
areas.[12]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality#cite_note-podhoretz-post-12>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality
So what does the Africa Position on ITRs (International Telecommunications
Regulations) mean to us?
>From the proposal one can deduce that we now intend to turn around Net
Neutrality on its head and give ISPs/Telcos a legal standing to charge
content providers and application service providers for the privilege of
their customers to access any website.
What would be the effect of this? As I said in my earlier posting the
principle around this is flawed. Why? Because this opens up the opportunity
for discrimination and anti-competitive tendencies. We are aware now that
some Telcos and ISPs are moving into Content Provision through the Triple
Play Mantra (TV, Phone and Internet). What is to stop discrimination in the
guise of competition? We must be careful that we do not put a regulator's
stamp in a competitiveness environment in favor of one player /industry
against another.
Nation, Standard, Citizen, Iqra, Google, CIO East Africa, Ma3Racer,
Pesapal, Facebook, Twitter etc will all then be bundled together and the
prerogative of the ISP/Telco will be what rules and NOT Market Conditions.
I have argued before about the ISP/Telco space and whether the current
scenario calls for a re-thinking of the business as usual model. There
seems to be a tacit agreement that something is amiss where some players
(the majority it seems) seem to be bleeding red ink. I cannot presume to be
an expert in this space but could the logical step be one of sharing
infrastructure to reduce Capex as opposed to everyone running around
digging up the whole country in an 'arms race'? Is this an area where the
regulator can assist? There is a legend around how Dr.Ndemo (Permanent
Secretary, Ministry of Information & Communication) managed to get the
first undersea cable landed in Nairobi despite industry not pulling in the
same direction (I don't know how true or false this is but the fact that it
is being bandied around is in itself a red flag). I suggested possibly that
the industry may want to embrace the Principles of 'Frenemy'?
Let's ensure we maintain the current status quo that has enabled innovation
and entreprenuership in the ICT Sector to blossom. The current discourse
about whether 'Silicon Savannah' needs to grow up and move towards creating
viable and sustainable businesses is what we should discuss NOT seek to
change the very environment that made this possible.
My two cents (with a bull-dog mentality) :-)
Ali Hussein
PS. It would be interesting to know the position of KICT Board, KITOS,
iHub, Nailab (and other hubs), TESPOK etc.
On Nov 9, 2012, at 3:27 PM, "Wambua, Christopher" <Wambua at cck.go.ke> wrote:
Ali****
** **
Thanks for submitting substantive comments on the African Common Proposals
on the ITRs. ****
** **
I wish to invite you to the Stakeholders Meeting on WCIT-12 scheduled for
Tuesday 13th November 2012 at the Laico Regency Hotel starting from
9.00a.m. Your input together with others that have been raised to date
shall be addressed during the said stakeholders meeting. ****
** **
Listers wishing to participate in the meeting are requested to send their
confirmations to Mary Kioko through kioko at cck.go.ke as soon as possible.****
** **
Best regards,****
** **
*Christopher Wambua*
*Manager/Communications*
*Consumer and Public Affairs Division *
*Communications Commission of Kenya*
*P.O. Box 14448, NAIROBI 00800*
*KENYA*
** **
** **
** **
** **
** **
*From:* kictanet [
mailto:kictanet-bounces+wambua=cck.go.ke at lists.kictanet.or.ke<kictanet-bounces+wambua=cck.go.ke at lists.kictanet.or.ke>]
*On Behalf Of *Ali Hussein
*Sent:* Friday, November 09, 2012 9:28 AM
*To:* Wambua, Christopher
*Cc:* KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions
*Subject:* [kictanet] Africa (and Kenya's?) Position to WCIT, Dubai****
** **
Listers****
** **
I have serious misgivings about the Africa Position to WCIT as presented
by CCK. ****
** **
I will highlight the main & pertinent proposed changes. There are good
clauses within the proposal that are pertinent and in line with current
trends. For example:-****
** **
*38A 4.3A Members States shall ensure transparency of end-user prices and
the provision of clear information on how to access the services and the
prices thereof, in particular to avoid unreasonable or surprising bills for
international services (e.g. mobile roaming and data roaming), and shall
ensure that Operating Agencies take the necessary measures to fulfill
these requirements.*****
*Reasons: This provision considers the users' right to have transparent
information on the international charges, bearing in mind the current
excessive data charges for roaming users.*****
* *
*My Comments*****
*This deals with consumer protection and it is high time that it becomes an
issue of international concern.*
* *
*54A 6.5A*
*Member states shall ensure that each party in a negotiation or agreement
related to or arising out of international connectivity matters, will have
access to alternative dispute resolution mechanisms and will have recourse
to the relevant regulatory or competition authorities of the other party's
state.*
* *
*Reasons: To provide for alternative dispute resolution and other
mechanisms, to preserve the interests of Member States and avoid abuse on
their small market power operators.*
* *
*My Comments***
*Commendable as this sets clear guidelines on dispute resolution and
possibly can guide against monopolistic behavior from dominant players.*
* *
*Environmental Issues*
*Reasons: To address the importance of the issue of saving the environment.
ADD AFCP/xyzA1/89*
*57B 8A.1 Member States shall cooperate to encourage operating agencies and
industry to adopt energy efficiency international standards and best
practices, including disclosure and labeling schemes, so as to reduce
energy consumption of communications facilities and installations.*
*Reasons: To request Member States to cooperate to encourage taking
measures to reduce energy consumption.*
*57C 8A.2 Member States shall cooperate to encourage operating agencies and
the industry to take-back schemes and recycling management facilities to
reduce e-waste resulting from communications facilities and installations,
[and to avoid causing harm to other Member States from such e-waste.] |
[and to ensure that such practices does not cause harm to other Member
States.]*
*Reasons: To request Member States to cooperate to encourage operating
agencies and the industry to consider avoid causing harm to other Member
States as a result of e-waste and should address also not causing harm due
to disposal of e-waste.*
* *
*My Comments***
*Commendable as these are in line with the current popular discourse on
environmental issues.*
* *
*The next three clauses leave me cold as they:-*
****
1. Propose to redefine Telecommunication regulation to include content
developers and providers****
****
2. Redefine the rules of engagement in Commercial Negotiations and
Contracts as this seems to allude that regulators can compel parties in the
content development and distribution space to sign revenue share agreements
with Service Providers in the Telco sector****
****
I would like CCK to please clarify these clauses below and to please clear
the air if what I have said above and below is inaccurate. ****
****
*ADD AFCP/xyzA1/63*****
*41K 6.0.4 Member States shall take measures to ensure that fair
compensation is received for carried traffic (e.g. interconnection or
termination).*
* *
*Reasons: promotes to a more sustainable model for the international
telecommunications ecosystem. Huge investments are needed to respond to the
dramatic traffic growth, this should not be generated mainly and from the
general user side, but from fair and innovative commercial agreements
between infrastructure operators and telecommunications applications
providers*
* *
*My Comments***
*This seems to allude to the issue of Telecommunications Applications
Providers (TAPs). What I found interesting is that the definition of TAPs
has not been defined in the document. Or did I miss it? So, if I'm to let
my imagination go I would assume that TAPs here alludes to platform
Providers, developers and owners (read: Facebook, Google, The different Ad
Networks, Media Houses, gaming developers like Ma3Racer, ihub, ilab mlab
developers and my nephew who is just about to launch the next Facebook
etc). *
* *
*Who is to define this 'fair compensation'? is it the purview of the
regulator to purport to define this? This I believe goes beyond the issue
of Telecommunications Regulation and starts to touch on the issue of how
free markets operate. We are treading on very thin ice here..*
* *
*41L 6.0.5 Member States shall ensure that their regulatory frameworks
drive the Operating Agencies to establish mutual commercial agreements with
providers of international communication applications and services in
alignment with principles of fair competition, innovation, adequate quality
of service and security.*
*Reasons: To foster increase in the customer base and enhancement in the
quality of experience (QoE), by offering more choices and more confidence
in those offerings.*
* *
*My Comments***
*.....drive the Operating Agencies (defined in the document as **Any
individual, company, corporation or governmental agency which operates a
telecommunication installation intended for an international
telecommunication service or capable of causing harmful interference with
such a service.) **to establish mutual commercial agreements with providers
of international communication applications and services in alignment with
principles of fair competition, innovation, adequate quality of service and
security.*
* *
*What does this really mean really? Is the state now going to purport to
'coerce' or compel commercial enterprises to enter into commercial
agreements? My earlier comments also apply.*
* *
*41M 6.0.6 The Member States shall take measures to ensure that Operating
Agencies have the right to charge providers of international communication
applications and services appropriate access charges based on the agreed
quality of service.*
*Reasons: To balance the revenues across the ecosystem, thus avail revenues
for operating agencies to invest in high bandwidth international
infrastructures, which will benefit the end users and provide them with
innovative services, while lowering ultimately their connectivity charges.*
* *
*My Comments***
*Is the state now abrogating to itself the right to tell content providers
to pay (to Telcos) for people to access their platforms and websites? I'm
well aware this is primarily targeted to the big boys - Facebook, Google,
the big global media houses etc. however, who is to stop the telco or ISP
in Mongolia or Thailand where Ma3Racer (a Kenyan popular gaming platform
that has most of its users in Asia) from blocking it and asking it for
access fees? ***
* *
*Correct me if I'm wrong, aren't these content providers already paying for
hosting anyway? What really is going on here? ***
* *
*Contrary to what this Africa Proposal purports to do 'benefit the end
users and provide them with innovative services, while lowering ultimately
their connectivity charges' my humble opinion is that it will have the long
term effect of killing innovation and the openness of the Internet which
has basically been responsible for a lot of the innovations that we are
currently seeing in this space.***
* *
*Overall I believe that these proposals are misinformed and look
suspiciously similar to the ETNO Proposals:-***
* *
http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number10.19/wcit-etno-proposals-not-so-bad**
**
*Dear all, I propose that we agree on a high level principle on how we
propose this country to move where the ITRs are involved (the lawyers can
then draft it in legalese). We in Kenya are at the forefront of ICT
innovation in Africa and indeed in the world. It would be a shame to be
seen by the rest of the world as traitors to the principals that made this
possible. And I believe that the Africa Position is exactly that..***
* *
*I know that this posting may make a number of constituents unhappy but I
urge all of us to put the country first.. ***
** **
Ali Hussein****
CEO | 3mice interactive media Ltd****
Principal | Telemedia Africa Ltd****
** **
+254 773/713 601113****
** **
Sent from my iPad****
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/pipermail/kictanet/attachments/20121112/f1ba42f3/attachment.htm>
More information about the KICTANet
mailing list