[kictanet] Telkom Kenya cries foul over social media’s free ride on its - Corporate News

Wed Sep 14 12:05:31 EAT 2016

I am just wondering what would happen to their data revenue if Facebook,
Google, Youtube, Twitter and Netflix users stop using the network for those
services. Is there business not selling data regardless of the use of the
data?

______________________
Mwendwa Kivuva, Nairobi, Kenya
twitter.com/lordmwesh

On 14 September 2016 at 11:44, Barrack Otieno via kictanet <
kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:

> Interesting paper Mwende,
>
> What would the internet be without OTT and content? Back to basics.
>
>
> Regards
>
> On 9/14/16, Mwende Njiraini via kictanet <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>
> wrote:
> > Good morning
> >
> > The network neutrality debate has landed on the shores of Africa.
> >
> > Here is an excerpt of an academic paper i had written some time back.
> >
> > *The net neutrality debate can be viewed as the next battle between the
> > netheads and the bellheads; providers of broadband access on one side and
> > Internet content and application providers on the other side. Frieden
> > (cited Orlowski 2006) states that the Bellheads are investing heavily in
> > fiber capability which will solve a problem that the “Netheads” have
> proved
> > themselves unable or unwilling to tackle, that of high quality video over
> > IP.*
> >
> >
> >
> > *Given that US government is keen to facilitate the rollout of universal
> > and affordable broadband[1] <#_ftn1>.  It can be argued that the
> aggressive
> > fiber rollouts could suffer if network operator shares continue to lose
> > value making it difficult to blame the companies if they did slow down
> roll
> > out. The companies, after all, have a duty to shareholders to pursue
> > maximum profits not necessarily to fulfill the goals of Internet
> advocates
> > (Drucker, 2006).   However one has to be careful in analysing the market
> as
> > forces in telecommunications can be misleading. Telephone companies, for
> > example, get billions of dollars in federal and state subsidies for rural
> > service.   Access charges are designed to compensate network providers
> for
> > the use of their facilities and the compensation scheme is in part funds
> > universal service.  Additionally, these companies may be claiming more in
> > the depreciation and the value of their assets.  *
> >
> >
> >
> > *Regulators may therefore seek to eliminate access charges by allowing
> > rates to rise to cover network cost if not service providers should pay
> > access charges.  This is however difficult to implement politically on
> the
> > basis of public interest.  Additionally, it is equally difficult to
> expect
> > new entrants to pay access since the avoidance of access is, at least in
> > part, the source of their perceived competitive advantage.  *
> >
> >
> >
> > *Historically, the FCC has not regulated the Internet or the services
> > provided over it. However following the 9/11 terror attacks in the US,
> > security is a key government priority.  Consequently, open access to the
> > Internet articulated in the FCC “Four Network Freedoms”, is subject to
> > legality of content and needs of law enforcement (Frieden, 2006)    The
> FCC
> > is thus constantly reviewing mechanisms[2] <#_ftn2> to implement
> important
> > social objectives, such as public safety, law enforcement access,
> consumer
> > protection and disability access, as communications migrate to
> > Internet-enabled services.*
> >
> >
> >
> > *On Wednesday, 28th June 2006 the Senate commerce panel voted against
> > amending the telecommunications bill by attaching the net neutrality
> > provisions that would prevent operators from blocking, degrading or
> > prioritising service on their networks (Orlowski, 2006).  The defeat of
> the
> > amendment could herald the return of the vertically integrated incumbent
> > firm providing services along the whole value chain.  Despite the fact
> that
> > the access network has been considered a natural monopoly area as a
> single
> > firm could presumably construct and provide local services at a lower
> > average cost than two or more firms (Spulber, 2002)[3] <#_ftn3>, Sir Tim
> > Berners-Lee, the creator of the web, views the defeat of the net
> neutrality
> > legislation as the entering a “dark period” for the Internet, if access
> > suppliers were allowed to choose which traffic to prioritise (BBC, 2006).
> > *
> >
> >
> >
> > *The higher costs of a “tiered Internet” levied content providers will
> > simply be passed on to consumers, directly or indirectly. As there is no
> > “free ride” on the network, and consumers will bear the costs of network
> > development through higher access charges and higher prices for online
> > goods and services[4] <#_ftn4>. Moreover, a “tiered Internet” will
> further
> > concentrate the market power of the cable modem and DSL duopoly,
> > eliminating competition in the conduits and leaving consumers with no
> > escape from content discrimination.*
> >
> >
> >
> > *The potential return of the two tiered Internet may further widen the
> > digital divide between developed and developing countries.  It may be
> > argued that successful internet organizations should contribute to the
> cost
> > of internet infrastructure either through Internet settlement agreements
> or
> > contribution to universal access funds.  This argument is based on the
> fact
> > that these companies are providing functional equivalent services, thus
> > there is a need for operators to maintain network integrity and for
> > governments to guarantee national security, and I concur.*
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > [1] <#_ftnref1> FCC defines "high speed" as 200 kilobits in at least one
> > direction.
> >
> > [2] <#_ftnref2> On February 12, 2004, the FCC ruled that an entirely
> > Internet-based VoIP service would be an unregulated information service
> in
> > USA.  However the FCC released an order requiring VoIP providers to
> deliver
> > enhanced 911 emergency services to its customers.   *Source:
> > http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/emergencies.html
> > <http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/emergencies.html>*
> >
> > [3] <#_ftnref3> This theory is based on the assumption that firms will
> seek
> > to leverage on economies of scale to achieve production efficiencies,
> > pricing services above cost and not precluding competition
> >
> > [4] <#_ftnref4> Scott (2006) predicts that companies like Google and
> Yahoo
> > that support their free services through advertising revenue will raise
> > their advertising rates, resulting in higher consumer prices on all the
> > goods that advertise on these sites.  While Amazon and eBay will raise
> > their rates to account for the extra charges and I-Tunes and other
> > pay-per-download content sites will charge higher rates as well, to cover
> > access charges by AT&T and Verizon.
> >
> > Disclaimer: Views expressed except those referenced are the author's own.
> > The full paper is available on request.
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 7:16 AM, Ali Hussein via kictanet <
> > kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
> >
> >> Listers
> >>
> >> This is getting abit tiring..Telcos complaining social media platforms
> >> are
> >> getting a free ride on their infrastructure.
> >>
> >> http://www.businessdailyafrica.com/Corporate-News/Telkom-Kenya-
> >> cries-foul-over-social-media/539550-3379938-9liqm4/
> >>
> >> What are your thoughts? Should Telcos charge companies like Google and
> >> Facebook for access to their networks?
> >>
> >> What would be next? A small fee for every website?
> >>
> >> #NetNeutrality
> >>
> >> *Ali Hussein*
> >> *Principal*
> >> *Hussein & Associates*
> >> +254 0713 601113
> >>
> >> Twitter: @AliHKassim
> >>
> >> Skype: abu-jomo
> >>
> >> LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim
> >>
> >>
> >> "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking
> >> what no one else has thought".  ~ Albert Szent-Györgyi
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPad
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> kictanet mailing list
> >> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke
> >> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
> >>
> >> Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/
> >> mailman/options/kictanet/mwende.njiraini%40gmail.com
> >>
> >> The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform
> >> for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and
> >> regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT
> >> sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and
> >> development.
> >>
> >> KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors
> >> online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and
> >> bandwidth,
> >> share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy,
> do
> >> not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.
> >>
> >
>
>
> --
> Barrack O. Otieno
> +254721325277
> +254733206359
> Skype: barrack.otieno
> PGP ID: 0x2611D86A
>
> _______________________________________________
> kictanet mailing list
> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke
> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
>
> Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/
> mailman/options/kictanet/kivuva%40transworldafrica.com
>
> The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform
> for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and
> regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT
> sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.
>
> KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors
> online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth,
> share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do
> not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/pipermail/kictanet/attachments/20160914/6955d0c1/attachment.htm>