[kictanet] Fwd: [Internet Policy] CIS's Position on Net Neutrality

[Barrack Otieno]

Quite usefull in light of this weeks discussions.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Joly MacFie" <joly at punkcast.com>
Date: Dec 5, 2015 7:36 PM
Subject: [Internet Policy] CIS's Position on Net Neutrality
To: "internetpolicy at elists.isoc.org" <InternetPolicy at elists.isoc.org>
Cc:


Published Dec 4.

http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/ciss-position-on-net-neutrality


   1. Net Neutrality violations can potentially have multiple categories of
   harms —* competition harms, free speech harms, privacy harms, innovation
   and ‘generativity’ harms, harms to consumer choice and user freedoms, and
   diversity harms* thanks to unjust discrimination and gatekeeping by
   Internet service providers.

   2. Net Neutrality violations (including some those forms of zero-rating
   that violate net neutrality) can also have different kinds benefits —
   enabling the *right to freedom of expression*, and the *freedom of
   association*, especially when access to communication and publishing
   technologies is increased; *increased competition*[by enabling product
   differentiation, can potentially allow small ISPs compete against market
   incumbents];*increased access* [usually to a subset of the Internet] by
   those without any access because they cannot afford it, increased access
   [usually to a subset of the Internet] by those who don't see any value in
   the Internet,*reduced payments* by those who already have access to the
   Internet especially if their usage is dominated by certain services and
   destinations.

   3. Given the magnitude and variety of potential harms, *complete
   forbearance from all regulation is not an option* for regulators nor is
   self-regulation sufficient to address all the harms emerging from Net
   Neutrality violations, since incumbent telecom companies cannot be trusted
   to effectively self-regulate. Therefore, *CIS calls for the immediate
   formulation of Net Neutrality regulation* by the telecom regulator
   [TRAI] and the notification thereof by the government [Department of
   Telecom of the Ministry of Information and Communication Technology]. CIS
   also calls for the eventual enactment of statutory law on Net Neutrality.
   All such policy must be developed in a transparent fashion after proper
   consultation with all relevant stakeholders, and after giving citizens an
   opportunity to comment on draft regulations.

   4. Even though some of these harms may be large, CIS believes that a
   government cannot apply the precautionary principle in the case of Net
   Neutrality violations. *Banning technical innovations and business model
   innovations is not an appropriate policy option. *The regulation must
   toe a careful line *to solve the optimization problem: *refraining from
   over-regulation of ISPs and harming innovation at the carrier level (and
   benefits of net neutrality violations mentioned above) while preventing
   ISPs from harming innovation and user choice.  ISPs must be regulated to
   limit harms from unjust discrimination towards consumers as well as to
   limit harms from unjust discrimination towards the services they carry on
   their networks.

   5. Based on regulatory theory, we believe that a regulatory framework
   that is technologically neutral, that factors in differences in
   technological context, as well as market realities and existing regulation,
   and which is able to respond to new evidence is what is ideal.

   This means that we need a framework that has some bright-line rules
   based, but which allows for flexibility in determining the scope of
   exceptions and in the application of the rules.  Candidate principles to be
   embodied in the regulation include: *transparency, non-exclusivity,
   limiting unjust discrimination*.

   6. The *harms emerging from walled gardens can be mitigated in a number
   of ways*.  *On zero-rating the form of regulation must depend on the
   specific model and the potential harms that result from that model.
*Zero-rating
   can be: paid for by the end consumer or subsidized by ISPs or subsidized by
   content providers or subsidized by government or a combination of these;
   deal-based or criteria-based or government-imposed; ISP-imposed or offered
   by the ISP and chosen by consumers; Transparent and understood by consumers
   vs. non-transparent; based on content-type or agnostic to content-type;
   service-specific or service-class/protocol-specific or service-agnostic;
   available on one ISP or on all ISPs.  Zero-rating by a small ISP with 2%
   penetration will not have the same harms as zero-rating by the largest
   incumbent ISP.  For service-agnostic / content-type agnostic zero-rating,
   which Mozilla terms ‘*equal rating*’, CIS advocates for* no regulation.*

   7. CIS believes that *Net Neutrality regulation for mobile and
   fixed-line access must be different* recognizing the fundamental
   differences in technologies.

   8. *On specialized services CIS believes that there should be logical
   separation* and that all details of such specialized services and their
   impact on the Internet must be made transparent to consumers both
   individual and institutional, the general public and to the regulator.
   Further, such services should be available to the user only upon request,
   and not without their active choice, with the requirement that the service
   cannot be reasonably provided with ‘best efforts’ delivery guarantee that
   is available over the Internet, and hence requires discriminatory
   treatment, or that the discriminatory treatment does not unduly harm the
   provision of the rest of the Internet to other customers.

   9. On incentives for telecom operators, CIS believes that the government
   should consider different models such as waiving contribution to the
   Universal Service Obligation Fund for prepaid consumers, and freeing up
   additional spectrum for telecom use without royalty using a shared spectrum
   paradigm, as well as freeing up more spectrum for use without a licence.

   10. On reasonable network management CIS still does not have a common
   institutional position.


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
Joly MacFie  218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
--------------------------------------------------------------
-

_______________________________________________
To manage your ISOC subscriptions or unsubscribe,
please log into the ISOC Member Portal:
https://portal.isoc.org/
Then choose Interests & Subscriptions from the My Account menu.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/pipermail/kictanet/attachments/20151205/065ccf45/attachment.htm>