This is a much awaited and an apt consultation as TRAI has limited itself to examining the Regulatory framework which should be applicable to only the OTT communication services (and not the entire OTT universe) vis-\u00e0-vis the TSPs. Examination of this issue was much needed as OTT communication service are close substitutes to the voice and message services offered by TSPs as witnessed by the large shift of voice and messaging to OTT applications like Whatsapp.<\/p>
The Telecom Advantage<\/strong><\/p> While TRAI\u2019s take on the critical issue is keenly awaited, it must be kept in perspective that the contribution of telecom sector to the Indian economy is unparalleled in several ways. It is the world\u2019s second largest network with around 1.2 billion subscribers as on December 2018. The sector contributes a whopping 6.5% to the country\u2019s GDP, provided several key consumer benefits over the years including record low tariffs globally, generated millions of jobs and opened up new avenues for revenue generation. Given the huge potential of the Indian market, the sector has also been a toast for foreign fund flows with cumulative FDI at a staggering INR 169,089 crore. Thanks to aggressive pricing and availability of handsets at very affordable prices, data usage has already crossed 3.5 million terabyte a month, and smartphone penetration is on an exponential rise year after year. It is because of the substantial investments and the wide availability and affordability of the networks made possible by the TSPs, that OTT applications and services have flourished.<\/p> Regulatory woes<\/strong><\/p> Contrary to popular belief, the exorbitantly taxed telecom sector, reeling under a heavy burden of license fee, spectrum usage charge, spectrum acquisition cost, does not enjoy a level playing field when compared to Over the Top Operators (OTT) Communication Services providers. This is principally the result of a symmetrical treatment originating from the present licensing regime.<\/p> OTT Communication Service providers offer communication services akin to TSPs, such as Voice (VOIP), Messages (SMS, Video, Audio), but do not have to pay regulatory levies in terms of license fee spectrum usage charges or pay for the spectrum acquisition. The telecom industry is of the strong view that OTT communication service providers and Telecom service providers should be subjected to the same ground rules Further, the strict regulatory framework often limits the way TSPs conduct their business and earn revenue. In fact, the plethora of regulations add on to their expenses, owing to compulsory compliances including QoS, data protection rules, lawful interception obligations, non-discrimination pacts, roll-out obligations, and services to rural and low-density areas.<\/p> OTT Communication service providers, on the other hand, currently face negligible regulatory constraints. Even in terms of service obligations, there are no uniform rules for these OTT players other than those that they themselves promise to end consumers. OTT Communication service providers are not bound to provide a certain level of the QoS, Data Protection and Privacy to its customers. Our preferred course of action would be to free TSPs of these licensing requirements and put us on the same footing as the OTT players.<\/p> Also, as data consumption on mobile has surged exponentially and is expected to continue to surge due to increase in the number of OTT platforms, TSPs will be required to pump in large investments in order to upgrade and add on to existing networks. This is estimated at USD 100 billion over the next 5 to 7 years, including the laying down of the PAN India 5G infrastructures. A non-level playing field between TSPs and OTT communication service providers acts as a disincentive for TSPs to undertake these investments. It is important to note here that the same set of services are currently being provided by two sets of entities \u2013 one, duly licensed and the other, unlicensed. This glaring anomaly needs to be done away with. Hence it is important to have some parity between TSPs and OTT communication service providers, for which defining OTT communication service providers is necessary.<\/p> However, because of the multitude of functionalities being offered by various OTT platforms, it is difficult to isolate communication from non-communication related OTT services. Hence, it would be practical to conduct tests such as those outlined by the EU (draft Electronic Communication Code), in order to identify whether a particular functionality forms a `substantial' or an \u2018ancillary' part of the service or platform.<\/p> Striking the balance between TSPs and OTT Communications services<\/strong><\/p> A way to address this imbalance between TSPs and OTTs is all OTT communications services in India that fall under the definition of ECS should be licenced by introducing OTT Communication Authorization under the Unified License. Further, the security related aspects, Data localisation and privacy should be applicable to all the OTT players, irrespective of their type (Communication services and non-communication services). These may include compliance with privacy requirements, compliance with Information Technology Act 2000, and compliance with the proposed data privacy law, amongst others. Similarly, the UCC Regulations of TRAI should also be applicable to these players. While many opine that OTT Communications services do not fall under the Telegraph Act, under the UAS Licence\/Unified Licence (Access Service Authorization), granted under the Indian Telegraph Act, the definition of access services, covers collection, carriage, transmission and delivery of voice and\/or non-voice messages over the Licensee\u2019s network in the designated service area. OTT Communication Service Providers are able to offer voice, video, and data services without being required to comply with the Indian Telegraph Act. Another option to tackle the imbalance, as mentioned, is to relax the licensing conditions and Regulatory Obligations for telecom service providers as well. In this regard a new set of rules\/obligations may be adopted for the TSPs. The new rules must be driven by clear policy requirements, which should be proportionate, open, transparent and non-discriminatory.<\/p> Security Concerns<\/strong><\/p> There are security related issues which needs to be addressed by all the OTT service providers (irrespective of it being Communication services or non-communication services). Currently, extraction and retrieval of data by TSPs is problematic if the data resides outside India or is beyond the direct control of the operator. OTTs should have an infrastructure in place to support TSPs with their existing Lawful interception system. OTT communication service providers need to abide by Data Privacy requirements, maintain all critical and sensitive data within India, meet all requirements related to traceability of subscribers, and follow procedures for sharing customer details with the Law Enforcement Agencies.<\/p> For example, in September 2018, South Korea mandated various companies to deploy physical servers within Korea and proposed regulation for OTT communication service providers. Similarly, Thailand has decided to create a \u201clevel playing field\u201d between OTT communication service providers and traditional telecommunications industry. Several Latin American countries such as Uruguay, Costa Rica, Columbia, Argentina and Brazil are also considering legislative changes to enable the taxing of OTT communication services players.<\/p> Therefore, the pragmatic way to go about it is to either bring OTT communication services under the present licensing framework or preferably relax the multiple regulations levied on the TSPs, which are acutely impacting the sector already under major debt and crumbling revenues.<\/p>","blog_img":"","featured":0,"status":"Y","seo_title":"A light touch, balanced regulatory framework: Telcos vis-a-vis OTT players","seo_url":"a-light-touch-balanced-regulatory-framework-tsps-vis-a-vis-ott-communication-services-providers","cms_link":"a-light-touch-balanced-regulatory-framework-tsps-vis-a-vis-ott-communication-services-providers\/3572","updated_at":"2019-05-18 08:47:04","time":"2019-05-17 12:21:35","authors":[{"author_name":"Rajan S Mathews","author_description":"Director General, COAI","author_designation":"Director General","author_company":"COAI","profile_pic":"retail_files\/author_1485515109_temp.jpg"}],"tags":[],"url_seo":"a-light-touch-balanced-regulatory-framework-tsps-vis-a-vis-ott-communication-services-providers"}">
电信监管机构最近宣布,它将很快推出意见过多的监管框架(OTT)通信服务。 这是一个多的期待和一个合适的咨询火车仅限于检查监管框架应只适用于奥特通信服务(而不是整个宇宙OTT)相对于茶匙。检查这个问题急需的是奥特通信服务密切替代品提供的语音和消息服务茶匙目睹的大转变像Whatsapp奥特的语音和消息传递应用程序。 电信的优势 虽然火车的关键问题是备受期待,必须保存在角度来看,电信部门的贡献印度经济在很多方面是无与伦比的。它是世界上第二大网络拥有大约12亿用户,2018年12月。该行业的贡献高达GDP的6.5%,多年来提供几个关键消费者福利包括记录全球低关税,生成的数以百万计的工作岗位和开辟了新的收入渠道。考虑到印度市场的巨大潜力,行业也被烤面包与累计外国直接投资对外国资金流动惊人的INR 169089卢比。由于激进的定价策略,以非常低廉的价格和可用性的手机,数据使用已经越过350万tb的一个月,和智能手机普及率是一个指数逐年上升。这是因为大量投资和广泛的可用性和可购性网络由茶匙,奥特应用程序和服务蓬勃发展。 监管问题 与流行的看法相反,过高的电信业征税,执照费的笼罩在沉重的负担下,频谱的使用费用,购置成本,不喜欢一个公平竞争的环境相比,在运营商(OTT)通信服务提供商。这是主要的结果对称处理来自当前许可制度。 奥特通信服务提供商提供通信服务类似于茶匙,比如语音(VOIP),消息(短信,视频,音频),但是不需要支付监管征收执照费频谱使用费用或支付收购。电信行业的强烈认为,奥特通信服务提供商和电信运营商进一步应该受到相同的基本规则,严格的监管框架往往限制了茶匙开展他们的业务和赚取收入的方式。事实上,过多的规定添加自己的费用,由于强制遵从性包括QoS,数据保护规则,合法拦截义务,不歧视协定,推出义务和服务农村和低密度区域。 奥特通信服务提供商,另一方面,目前面临微不足道的监管约束。即使在服务条款的义务,没有统一规则对这些奥特玩家以外,他们承诺终端消费者。奥特通信服务提供商也决不能提供一定程度的QoS,数据保护和隐私的顾客。我们首选的行动将是这些许可要求,把我们的自由茶匙奥特球员平起平坐。 同时,作为数据移动消费大幅上升,指数,预计将继续飙升由于奥特平台的数量,增加茶匙需要注入大笔投资为了升级并添加到现有网络。这是估计为1000亿美元,未来5到7年,包括放下锅印度5 g的基础设施。一个非水平的竞技场茶匙和奥特通信服务提供者之间充当抑制茶匙承担这些投资。重要的是要注意,同一组两组目前正在提供的服务实体——一个正式授权和其他未经授权的。这个明显的异常需要废除。因此重要的是要有一些平价茶匙和奥特之间通信服务提供商,为其定义奥特通信服务提供商是必要的。 然而,由于各种奥特提供多种功能的平台,很难隔离通信从奥特non-communication相关服务。因此,这将是实际进行测试由欧盟所概述的那些(草案电子通讯代码),以确定是否一个特定的功能形成一个“实质性”或“辅助”的一部分服务或平台。 茶匙之间的平衡和奥特通信服务 茶匙之间解决这种不平衡的方法和奥特奥特通信服务在印度属于ECS的定义应该许可通过引入奥特沟通统一许可下授权。进一步,安全相关方面,数据本地化和隐私应该适用于所有奥特球员,无论它们的类型(通信服务和non-communication服务)。这些可能包括遵守隐私需求,符合信息技术法案2000年,和遵守该数据隐私法,在别人。同样,UCC规定火车也应该适用于这些球员。虽然很多人认为奥特通信服务不属于《每日电讯报》法案,根据无人机执照/统一牌照(访问服务授权),根据印度电报法,访问服务的定义,包括收集、运输、传输和交付的声音和/或非语音消息在被许可方的网络在指定服务区域。奥特通信服务提供商能够提供语音、视频和数据服务而不需要遵守印度的电报。另一个选项来解决不平衡,正如前面提到的,是放松的许可条件和监管电信服务提供商的义务。在这方面一套新的规则/义务可能采用茶匙。新规则必须由明确的政策要求,而应该适当的开放、透明和非歧视的。 安全问题 有安全相关问题需要解决的奥特服务提供者(无论它是通信服务或non-communication服务)。目前,提取和检索的数据是有问题的,如果由茶匙数据驻留在印度或超出了运营商的直接控制。奥特应该拥有一个与现有的基础设施来支持茶匙合法拦截系统。奥特通信服务提供商需要遵守数据隐私需求,维护所有关键和敏感数据在印度,满足客户所有的需求与可追溯性,并遵循程序共享与执法机构客户详细信息。 例如,2018年9月,韩国规定各种公司部署的物理服务器在韩国并提出监管奥特通信服务提供商。同样,泰国决定创建一个奥特通信服务提供者之间的“公平竞争”和传统电信行业。几个拉丁美洲国家如乌拉圭、哥斯达黎加、哥伦比亚、阿根廷和巴西也在考虑立法的变化,使奥特通信服务的征税的球员。 因此,务实的方法是把奥特通信服务在当前许可框架或最好是放松多个规定征收茶匙,严重影响了部门已经在主要的债务和摇摇欲坠的收入。
电报
脸谱网
复制链接
