With reference to the editorial, "Regulatory vacuum" (August 11), the consultation paper on call drops and the subsequent regulation by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (Trai) were based on a fundamental question: Having paid for the service, why should a consumer be denied a reasonable call quality?
The "arbitrary" imposition of penalty on telecom service providers for call drops should have been complemented with satisfactory evidence of lack of investment in network upgrade. Lack of radio coverage due to inadequate spectrum, capacity constraints, overload on different sections of a network and resistance to setting up of towers are other issues that should have been factored in before a statutory provision for call drops was spelt out.
On the other hand, Trai's Prohibition of Discriminatory Tariffs for Data Services Regulations, 2016, was a welcome endorsement of net neutrality to safeguard the internet against platform monopolies such as Free Basics and to continue to let users be consumers as well as creators of content. The regulator was right in perceiving that platform services and zero-rated products masquerade as policy. They might narrow the digital divide but are discriminatory in essence and contrary to the interests of innovators and small entrepreneurs.
It is the regulator's duty to ensure that the market does not function in a regulatory vacuum and that consumers are not short-changed. Moving to a BAK regime from the present IUC one will help Trai test the waters to facilitate roaming-free network access across all telecom circles.
Shreyans Jain, New Delhi
Letters can be mailed, faxed or e-mailed to:
The Editor, Business Standard
Nehru House, 4 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg
New Delhi 110 002
Fax: (011) 23720201
E-mail: letters@bsmail.in
All letters must have a postal address and telephone number
The "arbitrary" imposition of penalty on telecom service providers for call drops should have been complemented with satisfactory evidence of lack of investment in network upgrade. Lack of radio coverage due to inadequate spectrum, capacity constraints, overload on different sections of a network and resistance to setting up of towers are other issues that should have been factored in before a statutory provision for call drops was spelt out.
On the other hand, Trai's Prohibition of Discriminatory Tariffs for Data Services Regulations, 2016, was a welcome endorsement of net neutrality to safeguard the internet against platform monopolies such as Free Basics and to continue to let users be consumers as well as creators of content. The regulator was right in perceiving that platform services and zero-rated products masquerade as policy. They might narrow the digital divide but are discriminatory in essence and contrary to the interests of innovators and small entrepreneurs.
More From This Section
The apprehension of the Cellular Operators Association of India that Trai will reduce interconnection usage charge (IUC) from the current 14 paise per minute, ahead of Reliance Jio starting its operations is ill-founded. The proposal to shift to a bill-and-keep (BAK) regime was ideated last year by then Trai chairman Rahul Khullar when the regulator had prepared a consultation paper on review of IUC.
It is the regulator's duty to ensure that the market does not function in a regulatory vacuum and that consumers are not short-changed. Moving to a BAK regime from the present IUC one will help Trai test the waters to facilitate roaming-free network access across all telecom circles.
Shreyans Jain, New Delhi
Letters can be mailed, faxed or e-mailed to:
The Editor, Business Standard
Nehru House, 4 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg
New Delhi 110 002
Fax: (011) 23720201
E-mail: letters@bsmail.in
All letters must have a postal address and telephone number