Centre for Internet and Society

What's Needed Is User-Centric Design, Not Good Intentions

Shyam Ponappa — 2013-01-25T11:26:40Z

The inadequacy of essentials and conveniences around us results from a slack approach to both design and execution. We know we are deficient in execution, but we need to be more aware of deficiencies in approach and design. Good intentions, while important, cannot substitute for good systems design and execution.

Shyam Ponappa's column was published in Organizing India Blogspot on January 6, 2013 and in the Business Standard on January 3, 2013.

Things That Work…
Simple aspects of everyday living that actually work in India can leave one wonderstruck. Like the daily newspapers, organised and delivered seamlessly, reasonably early in the day, almost regardless of where one lives provided it’s a city or town. Or the availability of milk, eggs, bread, vegetables, fruit, and whatever else for daily provisions. And this despite the supposed shortcomings of our logistics and organisation in the context of wholesale and retail markets. Some of the revolutions that we’ve lived through in the last two decades include the manifestation of such wonders, like the phenomenal and ubiquitous growth in the supply of dairy and poultry products.

On a different plane, as it were, are the changes in the quality of automobiles and the improvements in India’s roads, although patchy and considerably lagging. Likewise, there have been revolutions in mobile communications and in air travel, disregarding anomalies such as the horror of Mumbai airport on private airlines, with its incompetent cab mafia on arrival, and a disorganised and demeaning crush on departure, squeezing past crowded boarding gates. (This is the state of the commercial capital? Woe betide us — but I digress...) Another source of wonder is the performance of the Indian Railways. Much abused by exploitative politicians, given short shrift on everything from cleanliness and toilets to much else, overloaded by hapless passengers in desperate need of transportation. One can only marvel at these services.

…And Things That Don’t
And yet, there are debilitating areas that seem utterly intractable, like sanitation, water, power supply and communications services for data (apart from voice).

Comparing the state of sanitation or power with the railways, one might say the latter had the benefit of being set up as an integrated system since the 1850s, although deprived in recent times of systematic development and investment, and so reduced to decrepitude. By contrast, sanitation has been playing catch-up on our old, established society, behind the curve for hundreds of years, never having had the advantage of installation as ab initio systems. Open drains are an Indian feature, even in Delhi. A similar situation obtains in power supply, where the contradictions and inequities of piecemeal, encapsulated interventions that tried to address power generation first were followed by sporadic efforts to address transmission and distribution, with realpolitik all the while playing to the users’ self-indulgence of having it all without paying for it. This sense of entitlement without accountability has resulted in the vicious circle of “free power” that leads to no power, annihilating possibilities for improvement.

In communications services for data (broadband), we have a different kind of problem. For one, governments, citizens and activists don’t seem to get it that these services are as essential to infrastructure as energy and transportation. There is no logic to their exclusion, but it has taken the National Telecom Policy of 2012 (NTP-2012) to announce the objective that telecom is part of infrastructure, although the associated benefits, such as lower interest rates, are yet to follow.

User-Centric Systems
The malady with sectors such as power, communications and transport is that solutions seem to be designed without an integrated, end-to-end, goal-oriented perspective favouring users. For instance, otherwise successful initiatives like the Delhi Metro provide services from an islanded “product perspective” that is simply not user-centric in its orientation. This results in insufficient feeder buses, inadequate parking at the Metro stations, a gaggle of disorganised cycle-rickshaws at stations like Mayur Vihar, and so on. Instead of being an unadulterated blessing, a Metro station in the neighbourhood becomes a curse, because user needs are not treated as being central to the delivery of the service. Passengers are left floundering while people in the environs (like the denizens of Mayur Vihar) are left to fend for themselves. There is also the question of capacity and demand. Again, the “product perspective” results in overcrowding and other inconveniences. On the flip side, well-meaning though misguided critics attack attempts to build capacity in anticipation of demand, as was the Metro by proponents of a Bus Rapid Transit system pushing for the latter as a silver bullet instead of as an adjunct.

What Could Have Been, But Isn’t Yet
The Unique Identification Authority of India’s Aadhaar augured a potentially revolutionary electronic enabler. In practice, however, its design has been baffling. A brilliant concept – abstracting a smart identification number from a smart card – has been reduced to an identifier for cash transfers to bank accounts. The question is, why to bank accounts and not to transactions, whether for retail or for services, activated by a mobile phone? Kenya’s M-Pesa was the pioneer for mobile money transfer, subsequently enhanced to include interest earned on virtual accounts.[*] Introduced in India by ICICI Bank with Vodafone in November 2012 and State Bank of India in January 2013, not only would this be much more practicable as the majority of our population doesn’t have bank accounts, it would cost far less, while being much more convenient for users. It would obviate setting up millions of physical micro-accounts at relatively high cost at banks, as well as giving users proximate access to products and services.

Another puzzling aspect is the contradictory, sometimes changing signals about Aadhaar. It is supposedly voluntary, yet reportedly mandatory now for marriage registrations, yet not accepted by banks for account opening, nor by some mobile phone operators, nor for passport applications, nor for driver’s licences. And inexplicably, except as a ruse to garner votes from non-citizens, it is for all residents (who choose to apply?), and although it could include citizenship information, it doesn’t.

It is best to start out right, recognising that we need user-centric, end-to-end systems design and execution, and apply this approach across the board going forward.

[*]. http://on.ft.com/UpzONs

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/blog/organizing-india-blogspot-shyam-ponappa-january-6-2013-what-is-needed-is-user-centric-design-not-good-intentions

Market Structure in the Telecom Industry

snehashish — 2013-03-15T07:17:12Z

In this unit Snehashish examines the market structure of telecom industry — which include the teledensity, wireless, wireline, and internet services.

Teledensity

Teledensity means number of telephones per hundred people. The current teledensity in India is 78.10. However, there is a large disparity between urban teledensity and rural teledensity. The urban teledensity stands at 169.37 whereas rural teledensity is 38.53 only. The reason for the slow growth in teledensity in the rural areas is that it is less attractive for the telecom service providers to invest. Furthermore, providing service in the remote and rural areas also requires massive investment.


Teledensity in India (Rural, Urban and Cumulative) 2007 – December, 2011
Source: Department of Telecommunication, Annual Report 2011-2012

Public and Private Share in the Market

Annual Growth Rate in the Telecom Industry (1981 to December, 2011)


CAGR: Compounded Annual Growth Rate Source: TRAI, Telecom Sector in India: A Decadal Profile

After the Government of India gave up its monopoly in the telecom sector in 1992 the growth of the telecom industry was slow due to lack of roust policy. However, with the change in the policy and licensing regime in the 1999, it is evident from the above graph that the telecom industry recorded a phenomenal growth. There was 35 per cent growth in the compounded annual growth rate.

Wireless

Market share in the wireless subscription as on February, 2012

	The pie chart clearly shows that currently the private sector dominates the cellular market. However, this was not the case in the beginning. The changes in the market structure were due to the changes in telecom policy in 1999. The growth rate of number of wireless subscribers from 1996-2011 in the graph below, clearly depicts the growth in wireless subscribers after the change in policy in 1999. Currently, the three main players in the mobile services sector are Vodafone, Reliance and Bharti.

Wireline

Market share in the wireline subscription as on December, 2011

In the basic telecom services or wireline services the incumbent — Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) has the majority share in the market. This is due to the expanse of the infrastructure available to the incumbent, and its ability to provide basic telecom services in the rural and remote areas. The private wireline service providers do not have the capital to invest in building such infrastructure and there is no profit in such capital investment as well. Therefore, the private players mainly concentrate in urban areas where they can earn more revenue.

Internet Services

Market share of ISPs as on December, 2011


Source: TRAI, Telecom Sector in India: A Decadal Profile

The broadband services came into forefront after the implementation of the Broadband Policy, 2004. It laid down that the minimum speed for a broadband connection has to be 256 kilo bits per second. This has been revised to 512 kilo bits per second under the National Telecom Policy, 2012. In India, 59.6 per cent internet subscription is broadband subscription.

Currently, the main technology used for broadband access is digital subscriber line (DSL). About 85.1 per cent of the broadband subscriptions are via DSL technology. While the other technologies such as fibre, leased line, wireless, ethernet, cable modem covers only 14.9 per cent of the market. The main internet service provider (ISP) in the market is BSNL which has a share of 54.97 per cent.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/resources/market-structure-in-telecom-industry

Licensing Framework for Telecom: A Historical Overview

snehashish — 2013-03-15T07:13:56Z

In this unit, Snehashish Ghosh tells us about licence, and lists out the major changes in the telecom licensing schemes since 1991.

Before analyzing the telecom licensing framework in India, it is imperative that one must examine what is a liceince. Licence issued by the government is an authority, given to a person upon certain conditions to do something which would have been illegal or wrongful otherwise. For example, a driver’s licence issued by the government, gives the authority to a person to drive a motor vehicle. There are three main types of licence fee which the government charges: (i) initial licence fee, which generally is non-refundable, (ii) annual licence fee, and (iii) additional fee for allocation of spectrum.

Licensing framework has been an integral part of India’s telecommunication law. Under the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, section 4 gives power to the government to grant licence to any person to establish, maintain or use a telegraph. However, in the telecom sector, the government had complete monopoly until the early 1990s. Since 1992, the government has allowed licensing in the telecom sector. The major changes in the telecom licensing schemes are listed below:

1991: The government allowed private telecom companies to manufacture telecom switches for telephone exchange.

1992: The Department of Telecommunication (DoT) invited bids for licences for cellular service across the four metros. The DoT offered two licences per metro city. The process involved two stages. First stage, technical evaluation of the bidder and the second stage involved financial evaluation of the bidder.

The rejected bidders challenged the selection process on the grounds that it was unclear and arbitrary.[1]The Supreme Court decided that it would not interfere into the government decision making function until and unless they are patently arbitrary and unfair.

The litigation delayed the launch of the cellular mobile services by three years. Finally the first mobile services were launched in Calcutta in the year 1995. It also brought to the fore-front the lack of policy with respect to licensing and regulatory framework for telecommunication.

Licence Fee and Tariff: A minimum licence fee was specified for each metro. The annual licence fee was highest in Bombay. It was set at Rs. 30 million, which was increased to Rs. 240 million by the seventh year, similarly licence fee for Delhi, Calcutta and Madras were set at Rs. 20 million, Rs. 15 million and Rs. 10 million, respectively. However, by the seventh year the licence fee for the three metros were 160 million, 120 million and 80 million, respectively.

The licence fee was revised and the DoT asked the operators to pay Rs. 5000 per subscriber as annual licence. The licence fee was again revised and service operators had to pay Rs. 6,023 per subscriber.

The DoT also placed caps on the rental and tariffs. The service providers could charge a maximum Rs. 156 only as rental. The call tariff was set at a standard rate of Rs. 8.40; off peak was set at half the standard rate and peak rate was double the standard rate. DoT placed a cap on security deposit which had to be paid by the subscriber; it was restricted to Rs. 3000.

The change in the annual licence fee in the four metro cities is illustrated in the table below:

Metros	Bombay	Delhi	Calcutta	Madras
Licensees	BPL Telecom Maxtouch	Bharti Cellular Sterling	Usha Martin Modi Telstra	Skycell RPG Cellular
Annual Licence Fee (Rs million)
Year 1	30	20	15	10
Year 2	60	30	30	20
Year 3	120	80	60	40
Year 4-6*	180	120	90	60
Year 7*	240	160	120	80

*The service operator has to pay either the annual licence fee or Rs. 5000 per subscriber, whichever was higher.

[Source: TRAI, (1999c: 24-25) as cited in Ashok V. Desai, Indian Telecommunication Industry: History, Analysis and Diagnosis, Sage Publication 2006, pp. 77].

May, 1993: The DoT commissioned ICICI to study and prepare a report on the possibility of private participation in the telecommunication sector.

1994: The DoT took a step back, after falling into controversy, in its previous attempt to allow licensing in the telecom sector. However, the Finance Ministry was in the favour of private participation in the telecom sector and it argued that the incumbents need assistance from the private telecom service providers for increasing the tele-density in the country. In order to study the issue, a committee was set up under ICICI. The report finally culminated into the National Telecom Policy, 1994.

The National Telecom Policy, 1994 laid down the following criteria for the entry of private operators:

Track record of the company
Compatibility of the technology
Usefulness of technology being offered for future development
Protection of national security interests
Ability to give best service to the customer at the most competitive cost
Attractiveness of the commercial terms to the Department of Telecommunication[2]

1995: DoT allowed bidding for cellular licences and wireline licences. Spectrum was bundled with the telecom service provider licence. For the implementation of the licensing scheme, the country was divided into 21 circles (excluding four metros) and it was categorized in to circles namely A, B and C on the basis of the potential of the circle to generate revenue. DoT awarded two licences in each circle; one to the state operator and the other to the private operator. The potential service providers in order to be eligible for bidding for licences had to partner up with a foreign company. The foreign shareholder was allowed to hold equity share

Metros: Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai

Cirlce A: Gujarat, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra

Circle B: Haryana, Punjab, Kerala, Rajasthan, West Bengal, Uttar Pradesh (West), Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh (East)

Circle C: Bihar, Northeast, Assam, Orissa, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir

Eligibility for the private companies to bid for the licence: (i) financial net worth of the company making the bid and (ii) experience of the company in providing telecom services. The minimum net worth to qualify for bidding was set by DoT. A service provider in order to be eligible for bidding should have a minimum paid up capital of Rs. 1 billion and net worth of Rs. 10 billion. The auction of the licences was carried out through a first price sealed bid auction.[3] Two licences were awarded in each circle in order to avoid monopoly of service provider in a circle.

Licence fee and Tariff: A total of 34 licences were issued. The term of the licence was fixed at ten years which was revised to 15 years. The service providers had to pay an annual licence fee which was agreed upon during the auction of the licence. The annual licence fee was based on the projection of revenue generation. There was no allocation spectrum but the government levied charges for spectrum usage as well. The tariffs were same as for the metro licences.

Wire line Licences: DoT also issued six licences for basic telephone services.

Financial Breakdown: After the issue of cellular licences in 1995, six of the service providers were in default due to non-payment of licence fee by the early 1997. By the year 1998 the number of defaulters increased to eight.

The Bureau of Industry Cost and Prices (BICP) was requested to look into the matter. The BICP after investigation reported that 13 operators were running in loss. According to the BICP report, the telecom service providers were running in loss because of the high licence fee, interconnection charges and spectrum usage charges imposed by the DoT. One of the recommendations of the BICP was that the rental should be increased from Rs. 156 to Rs. 600. This would decrease the demand for mobile phones but allow service providers to sustain their business.

ICICI conducted a study, as well. The study revealed that 17 per cent of the consumers had not used their cell phone at all and 37 per cent of the subscriber had bills below Rs. 500 a month. This clearly showed that projection of revenue by the DoT was faulty.

Reasons for the Financial Breakdown (TRAI Report, 1999)

Later, in 1999 the TRAI studied the cellular operators. The study showed that main reasons for the financial failure of the telecom service provider were:

Heavy capital investment for setting up infrastructure, which was underutilized
Number of subscriber lower than projected
The average revenue per user (ARPU) was lower than the costs incurred by the service provider. The ARPU in circles A, B and C were Rs. 1100, Rs. 800 and Rs. 600 respectively.
Significant amount of the finances of the service provider were used to pay licence fees.
Operational charges also took a toll on the service providers.

None of the studies took into consideration that the industry was oligopolistic in nature and the incumbents flooded the market with basic telephone connections.[4] The obvious conclusion was that the revenue generated by the cellular operators was not able to cover their costs.

The financial failure of the telecom operator under the 1994 policy led to the implementation of New Telecom Policy, 1999.

1998: Internet services were rolled out in 1995 by Videsh Sanchar Nigam Limited (VSNL). In November, 1998, the government opened it up to the private sectors.

1999: The New Telecom Policy, 1999 allowed the migration of the licensees from a Fixed Licence Fee Regime to a Revenue Arrangement Scheme (w.e.f. 1/08/1999). Under the new scheme a licence fees was collected as proportional tax on the service provider’s revenue. Previously, there were two operators in each circle and the 1999 Policy allowed the government as the third operator in the circle.

The 1999 Policy issued licences for the following services:

Cellular Mobile Service Providers (CMSPs);
Fixed Service Providers (FSPs) and Cable Service Providers, collectively referred as ‘Access Providers’;
Radio Paging Service Providers;
Public Mobile Radio Trunking Service Providers;
National Long Distance Operators;
International Long Distance Operators;
Global Mobile Personal Communication by Satellite (GMPCS) Service Providers;
V-SAT based Service Providers

Licence and Tariff: Licence holders under the 1994 policy migrated to the new licensing regime, under the New Telecom Policy, 1999. In order to shift from the fixed licence fee regime to revenue arrangement scheme the service providers had to pay previous arrears in licence fee on a pro-rata basis till July 31, 1999. Under the new adjusted gross revenue, the service providers had to pay 15 per cent of their adjusted gross revenue.[5] The circle operators also had to pay spectrum usage charge.

TRAI regulated the tariff under the New Telecom Policy, 1999. It brought down the call tariff from the peak rate of 16.80 to Rs. 6 per minute with a pulse of 20 seconds. This allowed the consumers to make calls for a minimum of Rs. 2.00. TRAI also put a cap of Rs. 600 on the rental charges. After notification of tariffs in the year 1999, TRAI examined the accounts of the service providers and found out that under the 1999 licensing regime there was healthy competition and the service providers were providing mobiles services at price, below the TRAI ceilings.

Tariffs	DoT ceiling on tariffs under National Telecom Policy, 1994 (in rupees)	TRAI ceilings on tariffs under the New Telecom Policy, 1999 (in rupees)	Industry rates under the New Telecom Policy (in rupees) – average rates
Call Rates (peak-time)	16.80 per minute	6.00 per minute	2.03 per minutes
Rental	156	600	195
Security	3000	-NA-	-NA-

2000: The government issued licence for national long distance telephony (NLDO). There was no restriction on the number of operators to whom the licence was granted. The licence was issued for a period of 20 years on a non-exclusive basis and could be extended upto a period of 10 years once. The entry fee for NLDO licence is Rs. 2.5 crore.[6] There are 32 companies other than BSNL, the incumbent, which have been granted licence for national long distance services. This has facilitated healthy competition in the market.

2001: Licence for basic telephone services using wireless in local loop (WLL). This was the first time that the first-come-first-serve scheme was implemented for issuing licences.

2001: A bid for cellular licence for a fourth operator was introduced in January 2001. The auction was carried out in three stages. The fourth licensee had to pay a sum of 17 per cent of the revenue in addition to the entry fees.

2002: DoT issued licence to private operators for International Long Distance Telephony (ILD) services. The entry fee for ILD licence is 2.5 crores.[7] The licence was valid for a term of 30 years. Currently the annual licence fee on ILD service is 7 per cent on the adjusted gross revenue. However, DoT has revised it to a uniform rate of 8 per cent on the adjusted gross revenue from the year 2013-2014.[8]

2003: Introduction of calling party pays (CPP). Under CPP, no charges can be levied on receiving a call in the home circle.

2003: Unified Access Service Licensing (UASL) regime was introduced by DoT on the recommendation of the TRAI. The UASL “permitted an access service provider to offer both fixed and/or mobile services under the same licence, using any technology.”[9]

The country was divided into 23 service areas, 19 telecom circles and 4 metro circles for the purpose of implementing unified access services (UAS).

TRAI announced the guidelines for migration to the UASL regime on November 11, 2003.[10] An operator under the UASL was allowed to provide for free within its own area of operation, service which cover collection, carriage, transmission and delivery of voice and/or non-voice messages over licensee’s network by deploying circuit and/or packet switched equipment.

Licence Fees: The licence fee for the service operator was two-fold. Fee was charged for migration from Cellular Mobile Telephone Service (CMTS) licence to UASL. This fee was equal to the amount paid by the fourth licensee introduced in the market in the year 2001. Apart from the migration fee, an annual licence fee is also levied according to the circle in which the service provider is operating. The annual licence fee is 10 per cent, 8 per cent and 6 per cent on the adjusted gross revenue in the circles A, B and C respectively.

2007: DoT allowed issuing of licences for operating on dual technologies that is CDMA and GSM. DoT also allowed single licence to Internet Service Providers (ISP) but restriction was put in VoIP.

2011: The government introduced mobile number portability (MNP) which injected further competition in the telecom market. Under the MNP, a cellular subscriber can avail services of another service provider while keeping the same mobile number. Previously, change of mobile number used to be the biggest deterrent to change service provider, this was done away with the MNP scheme.

2012: National Telecom Policy, 2012 introduced Unified Licensing Regime. Under the regime, service operators can provide converged services. The spectrum has been delinked from the licence.

[1]. Tata Cellular v. Union of India, 1994 SCC (6) 651.
[2]. Para 9, National Telecom Policy, 1994 available at http://bit.ly/N4dlEk
[3]. In first price sealed bid auction, the bids are kept secret; the bids are then compared and the highest bidder wins and pays a sum equal to the bid amount.
[4]. Ashok V. Desai, India’s Telecommunication Industry: History, Analysis, Diagnosis, Sage Publication, 2006, pp. 83-84.
[5]. A licensee's adjusted gross revenue usually refers to the total amount of its gross revenue (including all charges, sees, sale proceeds, and miscellaneous revenue) minus interconnection and roaming charges paid to other licensees and service taxes paid to rhe government. See Model Cellular License, Schedule-II, at paragraph 20.1.
[6]. Department of Telecommunication, Annual Report 2011-12 pp. 18
[7]. Id. At pp. 19.
[8]. Notification no. 10-54/2010-CS-11 dated 28^th June, 2012 available at http://bit.ly/Q5nI5O
[9]. Recommendations on Spectrum Management and Licensing Frampework, TRAI, 11th May, 2010.
[10].Unified Access Services available at http://bit.ly/lOQZW7

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/resources/licensing-framework-for-telecom

December 2012 Bulletin

praskrishna — 2013-01-16T05:15:27Z

We at the Centre for Internet & Society wish you all a great year ahead. In the December 2012 newsletter, we bring you the draft early chapters of our “National Resource Kit” project for persons with disabilities (covering four southern states); and accessibility-related comments on the Twelfth Five Year Plan; the draft research on pervasive technologies and access to knowledge that we presented at the Global Congress on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest in Brazil; our comments on the privacy implications of including RFID tags in the proposed Rule 138A of the Motor Vehicle Rules, a report on the open access lectures delivered by Prof. Leslie Chan during his tour of India, reports of Wikipedia-related workshops conducted across three cities, and news and media coverage.

Jobs

CIS is seeking applications for the posts of Programme Officer (Access to Knowledge — Indic Language Initiatives), Developer (NVDA Project), Research Manager (Digital Humanities project), and Policy Associate (Access to Knowledge and Openness) and Policy Associate (Internet Governance). To apply send your resume to sunil@cis-india.org and pranesh@cis-india.org.

Accessibility

India has an estimated 70 million disabled persons who are unable to read printed materials due to some form of physical, sensory, cognitive or other disability. The disabled need accessible content, devices and interfaces facilitated via copyright law and electronic accessibility policies:

National Resource Kit for Persons with Disabilities
CIS received a grant of INR 54,83,200 from the Hans Foundation for Creating a National Kit of Laws, Policies and Programs for Persons with Disabilities on August 16, 2012. Anandhi Vishwanathan from CIS and Shruti Ramakrishnan from the Centre for Law and Policy Research are the researchers presently working for this project. Early draft chapters have been published. Feedback and comments are invited from the readers:

The Tamil Nadu Chapter (by Shruti Ramakrishnan, December 30, 2012).
The Karnataka Chapter (by Shruti Ramakrishnan, December 30, 2012).
The Kerala Chapter (by Anandi Vishwanathan, December 31, 2012).
The Andhra Chapter (by Anandi Vishwanathan, December 31, 2012).

Access to Knowledge

The Access to Knowledge programme addresses the harms caused to consumers, developing countries, human rights, and creativity/innovation from excessive regimes of copyright, patents, and other such monopolistic rights over knowledge:

Event Organised

2012 Global Congress on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest (FGV Law School, Rio de Janeiro, December 15 – 17, 2012). The Second Global Congress on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest was organized by Fundação Getulio Vargas, American University Washington College of Law, Columbia University, Open AIR, and ICSTD. Sunil Abraham and Pranesh Prakash participated in the event. Pranesh was one of the moderators in the Roundtable Discussion on Priority Policy Forums, Research and Analysis Needs and Commitments.

Research for the Global Congress

For the 2012 Global Congress on Intellectual Property and Public Interest event, CIS conducted research. Jadine Lannon (based on research by Annapoornima and Rohan George and with help from Yogesh Kumar did research on documentation of phones and their patent, Amba Kak did research on copyright and mobile licensing, Vikrant Vasudev conducted research on patent pools and valuation methods, Hans Varghese Mathews did research on mathematical models of patent pools and Nehaa Chaudhuri did research on analysis of 3Gand 4G patent pools.

Openness

The 'Openness' programme critically examines alternatives to existing regimes of intellectual property rights, and transparency and accountability. Under this programme, we study Open Government Data, Open Access to Scholarly Literature, Open Access to Law, Open Content, Open Standards, and Free/Libre/Open Source Software:

Event Report

Random Hacks of Kindness Global December 2012 — A Report (by Yogesh Londhe, December 10, 2012). Event was hosted at CIS office in Bangalore. CIS, Amnesty International India Office, Greenpeace India Office, HasGeek, Yahoo Research & Development and SimpleTechLife sponsored the event held in CIS office in Bangalore on December 1 and 2, 2012.

Events Participated

‘Information & Networks’ Partners’ Meeting (organised by International Development Research Centre, Canada in Rio de Janeiro, December 11 – 12, 2013). Sunil Abraham spoke in session on Open Business and IP.

Open Access Champion Leslie Chan Delivers Five Talks in India (Department of Library & Information Science, University of Kerala, National Institute of Interdisciplinary Science & Technology, CSIR, Indian Institute of Information Technology and Management – Kerala, Manasa Media Centre, Mysore University Library and SDM Institute for Management Development, December 17 – 20, 2012).

Access to Knowledge (Wikipedia Project)
Beginning from September 1, 2012, Wikimedia Foundation has awarded CIS a two-year grant of INR 26,000,000 to support and develop free knowledge in India. The A2K team consists of three members based in Delhi: Nitika Tandon, Subhashish Panigrahi and Noopur Raval.

Events Organised

Wikipedia Workshop at NMAIT (NMAIT, Karkala Taluk, December 21, 2012, co-organised in association with Metawings Institute).
Wikipedia Workshop at SRM (SRM University, Chennai, December 17, 2012, co-organised in association with Metawings Institute).
Marathi Wiki Workshop at TISS (Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai, December 8, 2012).

Blog Entries

Non Unicode ISCII Text Can be Converted to Unicode Now! (by Subhashish Panigrahi, December 19, 2012).
New Avenues: Media Wiki Groups (by Noopur Raval, December 28, 2012).

News / Media Coverage

A Report of Odia Wikipedia Workshop at IIT, Kharagpur (Samaja, Odia daily, Kolkata edition, December 3, 2012).

Videos

Wikipedia: State of Tech — A Talk by Erik Moeller (CIS, Bangalore, November 12, 2012). Erik Moeller, Vice President of Engineering and Product Development at the Wikimedia Foundation gave a talk.
Art in the Open Source Age — A Talk by Gene Kogan (CIS, Bangalore, November 30, 2012). Gene Kogan, a programmer and digital artist gave a talk.

HasGeek
HasGeek creates discussion spaces for geeks and has organised conferences like the Fifth Elephant, Droidcon India 2011, Android Camp, etc. HasGeek is supported by CIS and works out from CIS office in Bengaluru.

Upcoming Event

Meta Refresh (MLR Convention Centre, JP Nagar, Bangalore, February 22 and 23, 2013).

Internet Governance

The Internet Governance programme conducts research around the various social, technical, and political underpinnings of global and national Internet governance, and includes online privacy, freedom of speech, and Internet governance mechanisms and processes:

Analysis of Central Motor Vehicle Rules

Comments on the Proposed Rule 138A of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 Concerning Radio Frequency Identification Tags (by Bhairav Acharya, December 3, 2012).

Columns/Op-eds

Online Censorship: How Government should Approach Regulation of Speech (by Sunil Abraham, Economic Times, December 5, 2012).
The Worldwide Web of Concerns (by Pranesh Prakash, Deccan Chronicle, and Asian Age, December 10, 2012).
The Trouble with Hurried Solutions (by Chinmayi Arun, The Hindu, December 15, 2012).
Tomorrow, Today (Nishant Shah, The Indian Express, December 29, 2012).

Event Organised

Meeting of the Network of Internet & Society Centers (organised by Berkman Center for Internet & Society, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet & Society, Center for Technology & Society, KEIO University SFC, the MIT Media Lab, the MIT Center for Civic Media, NEXA Center for Internet & Society and CIS, Cambridge, Massachusetts, December 6 – 8, 2012).

Upcoming Events

DML Conference 2013 (Sheraton Chicago Hotel & Towers - Chicago, Illinois, March 14 – 16, 2012).

Events Participated

Second International e-Governance Conference (organized by the National Committee for Corporate Governance Electronic Iraq and the United Nations Development Programme, Rashid Hotel, Baghdad, December 2, 2012). Sunil Abraham presented on "Review of the Legal Environment in Iraq for Effective e-Governance".
Seminar/Artist Talks : "Outresourcing" with the Transmediale Collective (organised by the Berlin - Transmediale new media collective, December 3, 2012, Bangalore). Sharath Chandra Ram presented a White Paper.
World Conference on International Telecommunications (organised by ITU, December 3 – 14). Chinmayi Arun participated as a civil society representative.
Internet Driven Developments: Structural Changes and Tipping Points (organised by Berkman Center for Internet & Society, Cambridge, Massachusetts at Harvard University, December 6 – 8, 2012).
Annual Conference on Human Rights 2012 (organised by Estonian Institute of Human Rights and Google). Malavika Jayaram participated as a panelist.
State Surveillance and Human Rights Camp (Sheraton Rio Hotel & Resort, Rio, Brazil, December 13 and 14, 2012). Elonnai Hickok made a presentation on MLATS and International Cooperation for Law Enforcement Purposes.
Economic Impact of Internet in India (organised by Aspen Institute India, December 21, 2012). Chinmayi Arun attended this event.

Blog Entries

Transcripts from WCIT-12 (by Snehashish Ghosh, December 3, 2012).
Section 66-A, Information Technology Act, 2000: Cases (by Snehashish Ghosh, December 3, 2012).
Internet-driven Developments — Structural Changes and Tipping Points (by Elonnai Hickok, December 28, 2012).
State Surveillance and Human Rights Camp: Summary (by Elonnai Hickok, December 31, 2012).
Mining the Web Collective (by Sharath Chandra Ram, December 31, 2012).

Video

Technology Culture and Events in South East Asia — A Presentation by Preetam Rai (CIS, Bangalore, December 18, 2012). Preetam Rai gave a lecture.

Media Coverage

66A ‘cut & paste job’ (by GS Mudur, Telegraph, December 3, 2012). Pranesh Prakash and Snehashish Ghosh are quoted.
Ayodhya trending on Twitter sparks censorship concerns (by Surabhi Agarwal, December 6, 2012). Sunil Abraham is quoted.
Debate on Section 66A rages on (Vasudha Venugopal, The Hindu, December 10, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted.
Hacktivists deface BSNL website (by Kim Arora, The Times of India, December 13, 2012).
Govt likely to issue guidelines to clarify IT rules soon (by Surabhi Agarwal, LiveMint, December 16, 2012).
The freedom of expression debate: The State must mend fences with The Web (by Rahul Jayaram, India Today, December 18, 2012).
‘The IT Act is fine, but its interpretation is not’ (DNA, December 19, 2012).
No fear of losing internet freedom till Jan 15: Experts (by Kim Arora, The Times of India, December 22, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted.
UN agrees to review agencies governing Internet (by Surabhi Agarwal, LiveMint, December 27, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted.
Delhi gang rape: What Facebook, Twitter expose about govt (The Times of India, December 31, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted.
A note of dissent on cash transfers and UID (The Hindu, December 31, 2012). Sunil Abraham was one of the signatories.
The year social media came of age in India (by Javed Anwer and Rukmini Shrinivasan, The Times of India, December 31, 2012). Sunil Abraham is quoted.

Telecom

While the potential for growth and returns exist for telecommunications in India, a range of issues need to be addressed. One aspect is more extensive rural coverage and the other is a countrywide access to broadband which is low. Both require effective and efficient use of networks and resources, including spectrum:

Newspaper Column

Inflation Control Through Structural Reforms (by Shyam Ponappa, Business Standard, December 11, 2012).

Building Knowledge and Capacity around Telecommunication Policy in India
Ford Foundation has given a grant of USD 2,00,000 to CIS to build expertise in the area of telecommunications in India. The knowledge repository deals with these modules: Introduction to Telecommunications, Telecommunications Infrastructure and Technologies, Government of India Regulatory Framework for Telecom, Telecommunication and the Market, Universal Access and Accessibility, The International Telecommunications Union and other international bodies, Broadcasting, Emerging Topics and Way Forward. Dr. Surendra Pal, Satya N Gupta, Paranjoy Guha Thakurta, Payal Malik, Dr. Rakesh Mehrotra and Dr. Nadeem Akhtar are the expert reviewers.

The following are the new outputs:

Licensing Framework for Telecom: A Historical Overview (by Snehashish Ghosh, December 31, 2012).
Market Structure in the Telecom Industry (by Snehashish Ghosh, December 31, 2012).

Digital Natives

Digital Natives with a Cause? examines the changing landscape of social change and political participation in light of the role that young people play through digital and Internet technologies, in emerging information societies. Consolidating knowledge from Asia, Africa and Latin America, it builds a global network of knowledge partners who critically engage with discourse on youth, technology and social change, and look at alternative practices and ideas in the Global South:

Book Review

Not Just Fancy Television (by Nishant Shah, Indian Express, December 8, 2012): Nishant Shah reviews Ben Hammersley's book "64 Things You Need to Know for Then: How to Face the Digital Future Without Fear ", published by Hodder & Stoughton.

Media Coverage

What does it mean to be a digital native? (by Oliver Joy, CNN, December 8, 2012).

About CIS

CIS was registered as a society in Bangalore in 2008. As an independent, non-profit research organisation, it runs different policy research programmes such as Accessibility, Access to Knowledge, Openness, Internet Governance, and Telecom. The policy research programmes have resulted in outputs such as the e-Accessibility Policy Handbook for Persons with Disabilities with ITU and G3ict, and Digital Alternatives with a Cause?, Thinkathon Position Papers and the Digital Natives with a Cause? Report with Hivos, etc. We conducted policy research for the Ministry of Communications & Information Technology, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, etc., on WIPO Treaties, Copyright Bill, NIA Bill, etc. CIS is accredited as an observer at WIPO, and has given policy briefs to delegations from various countries, our Programme Manager, Nirmita Narasimhan won the National Award for Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities from the Government of India and also received the NIVH Excellence Award.

Follow us elsewhere

Get short, timely messages from us on Twitter
Join the CIS group on Facebook
Visit us at http://cis-india.org

Support Us
Please help us defend consumer / citizen rights on the Internet! Write a cheque in favour of ‘The Centre for Internet and Society’ and mail it to us at No. 194, 2nd ‘C’ Cross, Domlur, 2nd Stage, Bengaluru – 5600 71.

Request for Collaboration
We invite researchers, practitioners, and theoreticians, both organisationally and as individuals, to collaboratively engage with Internet and society and improve our understanding of this new field. To discuss the research collaborations, write to Sunil Abraham, Executive Director, at sunil@cis-india.org or Nishant Shah, Director – Research, at nishant@cis-india.org

CIS is grateful to its donors, Wikimedia Foundation, Ford Foundation, Privacy International, UK, Hans Foundation and the Kusuma Trust which was founded by Anurag Dikshit and Soma Pujari, philanthropists of Indian origin, for its core funding and support for most of its projects.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/about/newsletters/december-2012-bulletin

Inflation Control Through Structural Reforms

Shyam Ponappa — 2012-12-21T09:55:26Z

Inflation will persist until supply increases. Policies must therefore address supply through structural reforms, e.g., in telecom and power.

Shyam Ponappa's column was published in Organizing India Blogspot on December 11, 2012. Also read the version published by the Business Standard on December 11, 2012.

It’s ironic that when our economy finally developed a head of steam after many false starts, the sky fell in, as crony deals like the spectrum and land allocation scandals unravelled. A sizeable transformation of upwardly mobile consumption powered the transition from a laggard to global front runner, despite misgovernance. Now, the legacy of poor infrastructure, scams and an “Indian spring” – with many valid anti-corruption demands but impractical solutions – threatens to derail stability, severely damping productive activity. This jeopardises the very basis of our economic momentum: a burgeoning market. Assorted blunders add to the chaos, eg, judicial rulings that contravene the sanctity of contracts, and misguided institutional action, like the Reserve Bank of India ( RBI) trying to force the government towards fiscal responsibility instead of concentrating on providing stability and support for growth. This is aggravated by a government that does not seem to act in the public interest, and a frustrated Opposition that stalls governance and parliamentary proceedings.

The result is a marked inability, or unwillingness, or both, to act rationally and comprehensively on forward-looking, achievement-oriented plans — except to tide over crises, stay in power somehow, and capture the treasury for opportunistic ends. The Empowered Group of Minister’s ( EGoM’s) decision last week to merely reduce the 1800 MHz spectrum reserve price by 30 per cent where there were no bids is a good example. To see why, compare the end results that would best serve our common interests with the consequences of the government’s approach and actions.

What is the effect on inflation of butterfly wings or a hurricane in telecom? To decipher this, consider the drivers of inflation in India, and how such decisions affect them.

Supply constraints need structural changes in capacity and productivity

Our inflation is driven by increasing fuel and high-technology imports, with rising oil and coal prices and structural constraints on capacity and productivity — aside from expanding demand as purchasing power increases. (There’s also the import of gold, of course, possibly fuelled by lacklustre financial alternatives.) This shows up in a steadily depreciating rupee after August 2011, falling 25 percent from Rs 44 per dollar to Rs 55.

Some economists and foreign exchange advisors consider this as salutary, because India’s goods and services become more competitively priced. A weak currency can be advantageous up to a point, but only if it is exploited through competitive product and service offerings to yield sustainable profit margins. If, however, there is no complementary rise in capacity and productivity to capitalise on market access through the weak rupee, we end as we are today — where the disadvantages of essential imports with a weak currency outweigh the benefits of thin margins in low-productivity labour arbitrage.

Likewise, structural supply constraints remain intractable in the absence of increases in production. Increasing supply involves improving entire process chains: extension services and inputs for agriculture, market organisation and logistics, even changes to cropping methods such as alternatives to flooding rice fields. In other words, deep and sweeping changes in areas where we have not achieved such so far. The requirements for productivity improvement, likewise, are improved infrastructure such as communications services, power supply, storage and delivery including logistics and transportation — again, areas of weakness and inability to deliver that are mired in a policy stalemate, such as in power supply and telecom.

In short, inflation is likely to continue unless supply increases through improvements in production capacity and productivity. Therefore, waiting for inflation to fall before cutting interest rates to stimulate growth is futile. While rate cuts alone are inadequate, as there need to be structural solutions in parallel to build capacity and productivity, it is equally true that without integrated, synchronised initiatives in all these aspects, supply constraints will drive inflation.

Over the last two years, the RBI has shown the inefficacy of raising interest rates to combat inflation. It has only succeeded in slowing growth to a painful rate of under 5.5 per cent, contributing to our social pressures and turmoil. Instead of playing chicken and trying to stare each other down, the government and the RBI need to address growth in tandem, the former by eschewing fiscal irresponsibility and taking bold steps in the public interest, the latter by cutting rates, while introducing real-time systems for selective credit management to minimise misallocation and asset bubbles.

Decisions on spectrum as an example of structural reforms

The EGoM’s decisions on spectrum policy have major implications for productivity and user services for everyone, apart from the operators. Communications services are a basic enabler for effectiveness and efficiency. Increases in supply are facilitated once the infrastructure is in place. For this, we need supportive policies and incentives. Our spectrum allocation approach does not serve these purposes, because the growth in the sector has been largely of voice services and the delivery has been skewed in favour of remunerative urban areas while rural areas have insufficient coverage. This is partly the consequence of allocating narrow bands of spectrum that suffice for voice services but are inadequate for data delivery, and partly because of costs.

Auctions are inappropriate for developing economies like India because (a) they add to infrastructure costs in place of investment in service delivery; and (b) they lead to the fragmentation of spectrum for exclusive use that is contrary to what’s needed for data delivery. Our operators have an average spectrum holding of about 10 MHz, whereas they need at least 2x20 MHz.

Our policy makers seem unaware that new technologies for broadband need much more spectrum. Advanced data services are not possible otherwise, and rural users in nearly two-thirds of India will continue to be deprived of high-speed data access. A radical change in approach by sharing available spectrum will make broadband access much more feasible as well as cost-effective. This is the way to build productivity gains and distributed capacity for supply. The EGoM’s decision has to unleash this sector, instead of merely loosening a revenue-focused stranglehold.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/blog/organizing-india-blogspot-shyam-ponappa-december-11-2012-inflation-control-through-structural-reforms

DoT — Its Powers and Responsibilities

snehashish — 2013-03-15T06:24:19Z

The Department of Telecommunication (DoT) works under the aegis of the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology. DoT is headed a secretary, who is a senior member of the Indian Administrative Services. The secretary of the DoT reports to the Union Minister for Communications and Information Technology.

DoT used to provide basic telecommunication services. This function was shifted to BSNL after its formation in October, 2000. Presently, the main powers and responsibilities of the DoT as laid down in the Government of India (Allocation of Business) Rules, 1961 are:

Formulation of policy, allocation of licence and co-ordination with matters relating to telegraphs, telephones, wireless, data, facsimile and telematic services and other like forms of communications.
Co-operation with international bodies on matters related to telecommunication
Promotion of standardization and research and development in the telecom sector.
Promotion of private investment in telecommunication industry
Allocation of spectrum mobile and radio communications.
Administration of laws with respect to any of the matters specified in this list, namely: The Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (13 of 1885); The Indian Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1933 (17 of 1933); and The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997 (24 of 1997).
Supervision over the functioning of the following organizations: Telecom Commission, Telecom Regulatory Authority of India, Telecom Disputes Settlement Appellate Tribunal, Centre for Development of Telematics, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited, ITI Limited, Telecommunication Consultants (India) Limited and Administrative office of the Universal Service Obligation Fund.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/resources/dot-its-powers-and-responsibilities

November 2012 Bulletin

praskrishna — 2013-01-06T13:59:11Z

Welcome to the newsletter of November 2012 from the Centre for Internet & Society (CIS). The present issue features an analysis of Section 66A of the IT Act by Pranesh Prakash, comments on the draft Science, Technology and Innovation Policy, an introduction to 12 mobile devices that we are researching as part of the Pervasive Technologies project, submissions of civil society in relation to the revision of International Telecommunication Regulations that are to take place at the ITU's World Conference on International Telecommunications in Dubai, updates from the Wikipedia community on Indic languages, and news and media coverage.

Jobs

CIS is seeking applications for the posts of Research Manager and Programme Officer – Internet Governance. To apply send your resume to sunil@cis-india.org.

Accessibility
India has an estimated 70 million disabled persons who are unable to read printed materials due to some form of physical, sensory, cognitive or other disability. The disabled need accessible content, devices and interfaces facilitated via copyright law and electronic accessibility policies:
Blog Entry Human Machine Interfaces: The History of an Uncertain Future (by Sharath Chandra Ram, November 30, 2012).
Event Participated Workshop on Making ICT and Mobile Phones Accessible for Persons with Disabilities in Nepal (organised by ITU, November 9, 2012). Nirmita Narasimhan was a speaker in the session "Introduction: ICT and Telecom Accessibility, Good Practices in Policy and Industry Initiatives".
Access to Knowledge
The Access to Knowledge programme addresses the harms caused to consumers, developing countries, human rights, and creativity/innovation from excessive regimes of copyright, patents, and other such monopolistic rights over knowledge:
WIPO Transcripts We are providing archival copies of the transcripts of the 25th session of the WIPO Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights held in Geneva from November 19 to 23, 2012: WIPO SCCR 25 Day 1, November 19, 2012 WIPO SCCR 25 Day 2, November 20, 2012 WIPO SCCR 25 Day 3, November 21, 2012 WIPO SCCR 25 Day 4, November 22, 2012 WIPO SCCR 25 Day 5, November 23, 2012
Comments Comments on the Broadcast Treaty and Exceptions and Limitations for Libraries and Archives (by Smitha Krishna Prasad, November 29, 2012). Comments on the Science, Technology and Innovation Policy (Draft) (by Snehashish Ghosh, submitted to the Ministry of Science and Technology, November 26, 2012).
Pervasive Technologies: Access to Knowledge in the Marketplace As a part of the Pervasive Technologies: Access to Knowledge in the Marketplace research project, CIS is researching upon 12 gray-market mobile devices to generate a better understanding of the intellectual property implications of the pervasive mobile technologies available in the Indian market: Workshop Report Exploring the Internals of Mobile Devices — Report from a One-day Workshop at TERI (by Jadine Lannon, November 30, 2012).
Blog Entries ICOMM2012: International Communications and Electronics Fair (by Jadine Lannon, November 14, 2012). Pervasive Mobile Technologies: Meet Our Mobile Devices! (by Jadine Lannon, November 30, 2012).
Upcoming Event 2012 Global Congress on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest (FGV Law School, Rio De Janeiro, Brazil, December 15 – 17, 2012).
Openness The 'Openness' programme critically examines alternatives to existing regimes of intellectual property rights, and transparency and accountability. Under this programme, we study Open Government Data, Open Access to Scholarly Literature, Open Access to Law, Open Content, Open Standards, and Free/Libre/Open Source Software:
Event Organised Autonomy, Access, Infrastructure and Future — A Discussion with C S Lakshmi (CIS, Bangalore, November 29, 2012). A video of the event is published. Art in the Open Source Age — A Talk by Gene Kogan (CIS, Bangalore, November 30, 2012).
Blog Entry Open Government Platform (by Neeta Verma, Alka Mishra and D.P. Mishra, Informatics Magazine, July 2012).
Event Participated Science Gallery Workshop @ Srishti (organised by Srishti School of Art, Design and Technology and Science Gallery at Trinity College Dublin, Srishti School of Art Design and Technology (N2 campus), Bangalore, November 23, 2012). Sunil Abraham participated in this event.
Access to Knowledge Programme Beginning from September 1, 2012, Wikimedia Foundation has awarded CIS a two-year grant of INR 26,000,000 to support and develop free knowledge in India. The A2K team consists of three members based in Delhi: Nitika Tandon, Subhashish Panigrahi and Noopur Raval. Program Manager, Shiju Alex left the organisation. November 16, 2012 was his last working day.
Events Organised Kolkata: Tasting the Sweetness of Wikipedia! (Kolkata, November 3, 2012). First Odia Wikipedia Education Program (Indian Institute of Mass Communication, Dhenkanal, November 8, 2012). Odia Wikipedia Workshop at AML (Academy of Media Learning, Bhubaneswar, November 10, 2012). A Wikipedia Mini-hackathon in Delhi (CIS, New Delhi, November 11, 2012). Wikipedia: State of Tech — A Talk by Erik Moeller (CIS, Bangalore, November 12, 2012). An Odia Wikipedia Workshop at KMBB (KMBB College, Bhubaneswar, November 19, 2012). Follow up to Wikipedia Introductory Session (Bharati Vidyapeeth, Delhi, November 19, 2012).
Events Participated Wikipedia Hackathon (organised by BITS, Hyderabad, October 25 – 27, 2012). Wikipedia Women's Workshop in Mumbai (by Noopur Raval, Vidyalankar Institute of Technology, Wadala, Mumbai, November 4, 2012).
News and Media Coverage ‘Some Indian laws could be challenging’ (Bangalore Mirror, November 15, 2012). A Report of the Odia Wikipedia Workshop held in KMBB College of Engineering, Bhubaneswar (Sambad, November 19, 2012). OdishaDiary conferred prestigious Odisha Youth Inspiration Award 2012 to Odia Wikipedia team (Orissa Diary, November 23, 2012). વિકિપીડિયા ગુજરાતી માં પણ છે (by Harish Kothari, Cybersafar, November 28, 2012).
Blog Entry Typing in Indic Languages from Mobiles made Easy! (by Subhashish Panigrahi, November 19, 2012).
HasGeek HasGeek creates discussion spaces for geeks and has organised conferences like the Fifth Elephant, Droidcon India 2011, Android Camp, etc. HasGeek is supported by CIS and works out from CIS office in Bengaluru. The following event was organised by HasGeek in the month of November: Droidcon India (November 2 and 3, 2012, MLR Convention Centre, Whitefield, Bangalore).
Internet Governance The Internet Governance programme conducts research around the various social, technical, and political underpinnings of global and national Internet governance, and includes online privacy, freedom of speech, and Internet governance mechanisms and processes:
Analysis of IT Act Breaking Down Section 66A of the IT Act (by Pranesh Prakash, November 25, 2012). Fixing India’s anarchic IT Act (by Pranesh Prakash, Livemint, November 28, 2012). Draft nonsense (by Pranesh Prakash, The Times of India, November 24, 2012).
Analysis of Justice AP Shah Report Q&A to the Report of the Group of Experts on Privacy (by Elonnai Hickok, November 9, 2012).
Comments / Submissions to ITU Statement of Civil Society Members in the "Best Bits" pre-IGF Meeting. CIS was one of the signatories of this submission made to the ITU. Submission on India's Draft Comments on Proposed Changes to the ITU's ITRs. CIS was one of the signatories along with Society for Knowledge Commons, Delhi Science Forum, Free Software Movement of India, Internet Democracy Project and Media for Change. Submission by Indian Civil Society Organisations on Future ITRs and Related Processes. CIS was one of the signatories of this submission in response to ITU’s call for public comments. Indian Government's Submission to ITU: We have put up the text of the submission made by the Government of India to the World Conference of International Telecommunications, Dubai on November 3, 2012.
Event Participated India Internet Governance Conference (organised by the Ministry of Communications & Information Technology, FICCI and Internet Society, October 4 -5, 2012). Pranesh Prakash made a presentation. CIS was one of the supporting organisations.
Blog Entries Arbitrary Arrests for Comment on Bal Thackeray's Death (by Pranesh Prakash, November 19, 2012). This was re-posted in Outlook (November 19, 2012), KAFILA (November 19, 2012), and Shail's Nest (November 20, 2012). DoT Blocks Domain Sites — But Reasons and Authority Unclear (by Smitha Krishna Prasad, November 21, 2012).
Upcoming Events Technology Culture and Events in South East Asia — A Presentation by Preetam Rai(CIS, Bangalore, Near Domlur Club and TERI Complex, December 18, 2012, 5.00 p.m. to 6.30 p.m.). DML Conference 2013 (Sheraton Chicago Hotel & Towers - Chicago, Illinois, March 14 – 16, 2012).
Internet Governance Forum Pranesh Prakash, Chinmayi Arun, Malavika Jayaram and Elonnai Hickok participated in the Internet Governance Forum held in Baku, Azerbaijan in the month of November 2012. In total, CIS spoke in 12 panels: Best Bits 2012 (organised by Best Bits, Baku, Azerbaijan November 3 and 4, 2012). Pranesh Prakash and Elonnai Hickok participated in this event. The Privatisation of Censorship: The Online Responsibility to Protect Free Expression (organized by Index on Censorship, Baku, Azerbaijan, November 5, 2012). Pranesh Prakash was a panelist. New Trends in Industry Self-Governance (organised by Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford, UK and Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ, University of Zurich, Switzerland and Nominet, UK, Baku, Azerbaijan, November 7, 2012 from 4.30 p.m. to 6.00 p.m). Pranesh Prakash was a panelist. Civil Rights in the Digital Age, about the Impact the Internet has on Civil Rights (organised by ECP on behalf of the IGF-NL, Baku, Azerbaijan, November 7, 2012, 4.30 p.m. to 6.00 p.m.). Malavika Jayaram was a panelist. Solutions for Enabling Cross-border Data Flows (co-organised by ICC BASIS and the Internet Society, Baku, Azerbaijan, November 7, 2012). Cloudy Jurisdiction: Addressing the thirst for Cloud Data in Domestic Legeal Processes (co-organised by Electronic Frontier Foundation (Peru) and University of Ottawa, Baku, Azerbaijan, November 7, 2012). What Frameworks for Cross-Border Online Communities and Services (hosted by the Internet & Jurisdiction Project, Baku, Azerbaijan, November 8, 2012). Chinmayi Arun was a panelist. Governing Identity on the Internet (co-organised by Brenden Kuerbis, Citizen Lab and Christine Runnegar, Internet Society, Baku, Azerbaijan, November 8, 2012, 11.00 a.m. to 12.30 p.m.). Malavika Jayaram was a panelist. Law Enforcement via Domain Names: Caveats to DNS Neutrality (organised by Hong Xue, Vivekanandan, Wei Mao and Leo Liu, Baku, Azerbaijan, November 8, 2012). Chinmayi Arun was a panelist. Who is Following Me: Tracking the Trackers (organised by Internet Society and the Council of Europe, Baku, Azerbaijan, November 8, 2012). Malavika Jayaram was a speaker at this event. National IG Mechanisms – Looking at Some Key Design Issues (Baku, Azerbaijan, November 8, 2012). Pranesh Prakash was a panelist. Steady Steps.....FOSS and the MDG's (organised by International Center For Free and Open Source Software and Free Software and Open Source Foundation for Africa, Baku, Azerbaijan, November 8, 2012). Pranesh Prakash was a panelist.
Event Participated Privacy in the Social Networked World (hosted by the Centre for Business Information Ethics, Meiji University, Tokyo, Japan, on behalf of the Asian Privacy Scholars Network, November 19 – 20, 2012). Elonnai Hickok spoke on Transparency and Privacy in India.
Featured in the Media Power to youth (The Hindustan Times, November 3, 2012). The article names Sunil Abraham and Lawrence Liang as some of the young people who are shaping the future. 25 Indians to watch (FT Magazine, November 16, 2012). Sunil Abraham is one among the 25 rising Indian stars to watch out for. Malavika Jayaram named a top lawyer for Internet and e-Commerce in India (WHO’s WHO LEGAL, November 20, 2012).
Media Coverage Information security policy on govt agenda (by Surabhi Agarwal, LiveMint, November 6, 2012). Sunil Abraham is quoted. Law yet to catch up with tech-enabled peeping toms (by Sandhya Soman & Pratiksha Ramkumar, Times of India, November 7, 2012). Sunil Abraham is quoted. India second in requesting user info: Google (by Karthik Subramaniam, Hindu, November 14, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted. Post and be Damned (by Kavita Shanmugham, November 14, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted. India second in keeping tabs on netizens (by Ishan Srivastava, The Times of India, November 15, 2012). India ranks second globally in accessing private details of users (thinkdigit, November 15, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted. Google's 'Transparency Report' sketchy, inconclusive: Government (by Indu Nandakumar, Economic Times, November 17, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted. Women Arrested in Mumbai for Complaining on Facebook (by Neha Thirani and Hari Kumar, New York Times, November 19, 2012). Girls arrested for Facebook post on Thackeray get bail (FirstPost, November 19, 2012). Arrest of girl over Thackeray FB update a clear misuse of Sec 295A (FirstPost, November 19, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted. How to Steer Clear of India’s Strict Internet Laws (by Sangeeta Rajesh and Heather Timmons, New York Times, November 20, 2012). Internet users flay Mumbai girls' arrest over Facebook post (IBN Live, November 20, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted. Arrests over Facebook posts: Why we’re on a dangerous slide (Venky Vembu, FirstPost, November 20, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted. Girl's arrest draws flak on social media (The Times of India, November 20, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted. India's Shame: World Reacts to FB Post Arrest (by Sonal Bhadoria, India Times, November 21, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted. Indian government at second position after U.S.A for demanding user data from Google (WHDI Reviews, November 22, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted. Indians Rank Second For Online Snooping (Indolink, November 23, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted. Civil society & industry oppose India’s plans to modify ITRs (by Shalini Singh, The Hindu, November 23, 2012). Sunil Abraham is quoted. Amnesty International calls for review of 66A of IT act (by Nirmalya Behera, Business Standard, November 28, 2012). Thousands go online against 66A (by Apoorva Dutt, DNA, November 29, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted. The flaw in cyber law (by S Ronendra Singh, Hindu Business Line, November 29, 2012). Sunil Abraham and Snehashish Ghosh are quoted. Govt tweaks enforcement of IT Act after spate of arrests (by Surabhi Agarwal, LiveMint, November 29, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted. Yes, You Can Get Arrested for a Facebook Status Update Now (by David Wagner, Atlantic Wire, November 29, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted. The real Sibal’s law: Resisting Section 66A is futile (by Lakshmi Chaudhry, FirstPost, November 30, 2012). Pranesh Prakash’s blog post on section 66A which was also published in Outlook is quoted.
Videos Women arrested for Facebook post: Did cops act under Sena pressure? (NDTV, November 19, 2012). YP Singh, Alyque Padamsee, Rohan Joshi, Karuna Nundy and Pranesh Prakash took part in a discussion about the arrest of two girls over a Facebook comment. The Last Word: Is there a need to review Information Technology Act? (CNN-IBN, November 20, 2012). Aryaman Sundaram, Pavan Duggal, Pranesh Prakash and Ravi Visvesvaraya Prasad took part in a discussion with Karan Thapar on section 66A of the IT Act. Interview with Pranesh Prakash (by Surabhi Agarwal, LiveMint, November 30, 2012).
Telecom While the potential for growth and returns exist for telecommunications in India, a range of issues need to be addressed. One aspect is more extensive rural coverage and the other is a countrywide access to broadband which is low. Both require effective and efficient use of networks and resources, including spectrum:
Building Knowledge and Capacity around Telecommunication Policy in India Ford Foundation has given a grant of USD 2,00,000 to CIS to build expertise in the area of telecommunications in India. The knowledge repository deals with these modules: Introduction to Telecommunications, Telecommunications Infrastructure and Technologies, Government of India Regulatory Framework for Telecom, Telecommunication and the Market, Universal Access and Accessibility, The International Telecommunications Union and other international bodies, Broadcasting, Emerging Topics and Way Forward. Dr. Surendra Pal, Satya N Gupta, Paranjoy Guha Thakurta, Payal Malik, Dr. Rakesh Mehrotra and Dr. Nadeem Akhtar are the expert reviewers.
The following are the new outputs: DoT — Its Powers and Responsibilities (by Snehashish Ghosh, November 30, 2012). Government Policy and Guidelines (by Snehashish Ghosh, November 30, 2012). TRAI Regulations (by Snehashish Ghosh, November 30, 2012). TRAI Telecommunication Tariff Orders (by Snehashish Ghosh, November 30, 2012).
Newspaper Columns Super WiFi & Shared Spectrum: A Time to Start Sharing (by Shyam Ponappa, Organizing India Blogspot on November 3, 2012 and Business Standard, November 1, 2012). Folly of Mandating Spectrum Auctions (by Jayna Kothari, Hindu Business Line, November 24, 2012).
Event Participated 2nd MPL Faculty Workshop (North Zone) on Teaching Public Policy, Media and Law (Central University, Rajasthan, November 1-2, 2012). Snehashish Ghosh made a presentation on "Building a Telecom Knowledge Repository."
Digital Natives Digital Natives with a Cause? examines the changing landscape of social change and political participation in light of the role that young people play through digital and Internet technologies, in emerging information societies. Consolidating knowledge from Asia, Africa and Latin America, it builds a global network of knowledge partners who critically engage with discourse on youth, technology and social change, and look at alternative practices and ideas in the Global South:
Interview Whose Change Is It Anyway? \| DML2013: As a preparation for the DML conference, Nishant Shah had an interview with Howard Rheingold, a cyberculture pioneer, social media innovator, and author of "Smart Mobs. Watch the video on YouTube.
About CIS CIS was registered as a society in Bangalore in 2008. As an independent, non-profit research organisation, it runs different policy research programmes such as Accessibility, Access to Knowledge, Openness, Internet Governance, and Telecom. The policy research programmes have resulted in outputs such as the e-Accessibility Policy Handbook for Persons with Disabilities with ITU and G3ict, and Digital Alternatives with a Cause?, Thinkathon Position Papers and the Digital Natives with a Cause? Report with Hivos, etc. We conducted policy research for the Ministry of Communications & Information Technology, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, etc., on WIPO Treaties, Copyright Bill, NIA Bill, etc. CIS is accredited as an observer at WIPO, and has given policy briefs to delegations from various countries, our Programme Manager, Nirmita Narasimhan won the National Award for Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities from the Government of India and also received the NIVH Excellence Award.
Follow us elsewhere Get short, timely messages from us on Twitter Join the CIS group on Facebook Visit us at http://cis-india.org
Support Us Please help us defend consumer / citizen rights on the Internet! Write a cheque in favour of ‘The Centre for Internet and Society’ and mail it to us at No. 194, 2nd ‘C’ Cross, Domlur, 2nd Stage, Bengaluru – 5600 71.
Request for Collaboration We invite researchers, practitioners, and theoreticians, both organisationally and as individuals, to collaboratively engage with Internet and society and improve our understanding of this new field. To discuss the research collaborations, write to Sunil Abraham, Executive Director, at sunil@cis-india.org or Nishant Shah, Director – Research, at nishant@cis-india.org

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/about/newsletters/november-2012-bulletin

Folly of Mandating Spectrum Auctions

Jayna Kothari — 2012-12-03T09:47:30Z

The recent failure of the 2G spectrum auctions has brought to the fore serious questions on auctions being the only mode for allocation of spectrum.

This article by Jayna Kothari was published in the Business Line print edition dated November 24, 2012.

It was reported that as against the expectation of Rs 40,000 crore, the Government received bids for just Rs 9,224 crore. The turnout was so weak that only 18 of the 22 telecom circles received a bid.

The auctions were conducted in fulfilment of the mandate given by the Supreme Court — that for spectrum, auctions were the only equitable manner for allocation.

This was first held by the Supreme Court in its judgment in CPIL and Others vs Union of India and Others (“the 2G case”), where the Court set aside the 122 spectrum licences that were allotted on a first-come-first-served basis, and went so far as to declare that for spectrum and all natural resources, auctions would be the only method for allocation that would fulfil the constitutional requirements of fairness, equality and transparency guaranteed in Article 14.

Contrary Positions

This was a highly problematic declaration — to mandate allocation of spectrum and all natural resources through auction. This observation was taken to Supreme Court once again in a Presidential Reference by the Government. In its September 2012 order on the Presidential Reference, the Supreme Court held that for all other natural resources auction cannot be mandated as the only method, but oddly carved out an exception for spectrum.

It reiterated that for spectrum, auctions shall continue to be the only method for allocation. The judgment held that the observations in the 2G case, “….could not apply beyond the specific case of spectrum, which according to the law declared in the 2G case is to be alienated only by auction and no other method.”

On the other hand, in the Presidential Reference it was held repeatedly by the Court that “…it cannot, and shall not, be the endeavour of this Court to evaluate the efficacy of auction vis-à-vis other methods of disposal of natural resources. The Court cannot mandate one method to be followed in all facts and circumstances. Therefore, auction, an economic choice of disposal of natural resources, is not a constitutional mandate.” When this was the opinion of the Court, it is hard to understand why auctions were mandated for spectrum.

Justice Kehar’s separate opinion perhaps provides support for an interpretation that auctions were never meant to be the only mandate for all distribution of resources, even for spectrum.

In the Presidential Reference, the Supreme Court did perhaps not want to appear to interfere in its earlier judgment where the 122 licences were set aside. The government also, in an attempt to not have the entire Reference rejected, conceded that it was not seeking an opinion of the court on spectrum allocation and accepted auctions as the only method for allocation, although several core questions in the Reference were concentrated on spectrum.

An Intervention Brief was filed on behalf of the Centre for Internet and Society urging the Court to reconsider its mandate specifically for spectrum, citing examples of spectrum auction failures around the world.

These arguments were not accepted because both the Court and the Government did not want to touch spectrum allocation — it was a delicate issue, and they tiptoed around it. The mandate of the court on auctions, as being the only method for spectrum allocation, stood firmly reinforced.

Alternatives to Auctions

Are auctions, with all their promises of maximisation of revenue, the only mode in the common public interest for allocation of spectrum? Clearly not, going by the recent auction failure which failed due to underbidding, where none of the promised revenue was recovered.

The Constitution in Article 39b mandates that the State shall, in particular, direct its policy towards securing that the ownership and control of the material resources of the community are so distributed as best to subserve the common good. Thus, it is clear that the State’s object cannot be merely to maximise revenue but the policy of allocation and distribution of spectrum chosen must be towards securing the common good and keeping the public interest in mind.

There have been several instances worldwide where spectrum auctions have failed. A 2006 Report by Gregory F. Rose and Mark Lloyd, analyses spectrum auctions in the US from 1993 onwards and found that along with problems of overbidding, auctions had also failed due to underbidding in the US. Collectively, these trends of overbidding, pre-emptive bidding and underbidding characteristic only to auctions, sometimes result in disastrous consequences. Thus the argument that auctions maximise revenue, fails in the face of the recent failure of the 2G auctions. This affects the quality of services rolled out to consumers.

The present fiasco shows the danger of mandating any one method, such as auctions, for spectrum allocation. With the Government’s hands tied by the Supreme Court mandate, other possible options for spectrum such as the revenue sharing model, spectrum sharing and the creation of a spectrum commons are now not available. Perhaps these and many other modes of allocation would be in the fulfilment of the common good at a time when auction may not be right.

Courts and Policy

So, where do we go from here? Do we look for an interpretation in these judgments that would give a way out for the government to implement different modes of allocation for spectrum? Or would this give ground to a fresh case for review? These are all possibilities that need to be explored.

It is time we re-look at the role of the courts in policy matters. As far back as in 1995, the Supreme Court, when dealing with airwaves in Secretary, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting and others vs Cricket Association of Bengal and others, held, that, matters of policy are for Parliament to consider and not for courts.

Let us take this principle seriously and learn lessons from this auction failure. Mandating any one mode of allocation as a constitutional mandate can never be in the interest of the larger common good.

The Supreme Court should not have been rigid about allocating spectrum only through auction, given its mixed record the world over.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/blog/the-hindu-businessline-november-24-2012-jayna-kothari-folly-of-mandating-spectrum-auctions

Civil society & industry oppose India’s plans to modify ITRs

praskrishna — 2012-11-30T09:42:17Z

Industry fears ITU control over Internet; excessive content control and surveillance an issue for civil society.

Shalini Singh's article was published in the Hindu on November 23, 2012.

India’s proposal on International Telecommunications Regulations (ITRs), submitted last month to the International Telecommunications Union (ITU), the U.N. agency responsible for information and communication technologies, has drawn opposition from, and fears of content control among, civil society and the industry alike.

Sunil Abraham, Executive Director, Centre for Internet Society, told The Hindu: “The Indian government’s position on the ITRs can be improved, particularly with regard to the proposed definitions, approach to cyber security, scope of regulation.” However, he said, “we are confident that the Indian position will protect consumer and citizen interest once the government implements changes based on inputs from all… stakeholders.”

The National Association of Software and Services Companies (NASSCOM), which represents the $100-billion IT and BPO industry, has strong views against the Internet governance model of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Numbers and Names (ICANN), but favours self-regulation. Its president Som Mittal says: “NASSCOM does not favour oversight by an existing U.N. organisation like ITU. Internet and infrastructure have to be in the hands of expert organisations with proven experience.” NASSCOM has also expressed discomfort with the inclusion of “ICTs along with processing” in Section 21E of India’s proposal, since this would subject IT and BPO industries to inter-governmental regulation through the ITRs.

The Cellular Operators Association of India (COAI), which represents India’s largest mobile operators with nearly 700 million subscribers, has also opposed any role for ITU in the areas of international roaming and Internet governance, fearing a direct impact on domestic network architecture, costs and technology choices. COAI director-general Rajan Mathews said: “We are already regulated by the Department of Telecom (DoT) and the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI). Placing the ITU’s jurisdiction over us — where we neither have voice nor recourse — is unacceptable.” The COAI’s position is consistent with the GSM Association (GSMA), the world’s largest association of mobile companies representing 800 operators spanning 220 countries. The COAI further alleges that most of its inputs “have been rejected without reasons assigned or even a meeting.” It has lodged a protest with the DoT.

The Internet Service Providers Association of India (ISPAI) has similarly protested against ITU’s jurisdiction over issues of Internet governance, architecture and cost.

Subho Ray, president, Internet & Mobile Association of India (IAMAI), said: “We represent a vast majority of Internet companies but have not been consulted by the DoT. We are completely opposed to ITU’s jurisdiction in any area related to Internet policy.”

The FICCI has also given detailed inputs on the dangers of allowing ITU’s jurisdiction, especially in areas of Internet policy and governance. It supports a bottom-up consultative and consensus-led multi-stakeholder approach, similar to the one propounded by Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal at the Internet Governance Forum, the world’s largest multi-stakeholder conference, held in Baku.

Several prominent civil society groups and members of academia involved in Internet governance also have apprehensions about expanding the ITU’s reach to Internet regulation through the ITRs. In a November 15, 2012 letter to Telecom Secretary R. Chandrashekhar, Society for Knowledge Commons, Internet Democracy Project, Free Software Movement of India, Delhi Science Forum, Media for Change and Software Freedom Law Center have complained about not having been consulted, while warning that India’s proposal “could have far reaching implications for the Internet.”

On the issue of cyber security, industry associations and several civil society groups are unanimously against any role for ITU, pointing out that including ill-defined terms such as ‘spam’ and ‘network fraud’ in a binding treaty is a terrible idea. Further, cyber security commitments can force India to cooperate with countries whose military and strategic interests are against it.

Kamlesh Bajaj, CEO, Data Security Council of India, and head of NASSCOM’s security initiatives, said: “Cyber security is sought to be taken over by ITU — an area in which it has little experience. Cyber security includes areas of application security, identity and access management, web security, content filtering, cyber forensics, data security, including issues such as cyber espionage and cyber warfare. The ITU has had no involvement in these matters over the last two decades, and should therefore stay out of them.”

Similar views have been expressed in varying degrees by the COAI, the IAMAI, the ISPAI and the FICCI. Dr. Ray of the IAMAI says: “cyber security is essentially a state prerogative and should not be part of an external treaty obligation. Any attempt to channel it through the ITU may be counter productive.”

Mr. Sibal, who has already been challenged by opposition to the domestic IT rules, is aware that if left unaddressed, opposition to India’s stance on ITRs will only escalate at a national and global level, and that if corrections have to be made in India’s position, those will have to be done consensually within the governance structure. Mr. Sibal confirmed that while cyber security was an area of discussion with the ITU, “the ITU does not have any role in Internet governance.”

According to him, either he or the Department will hold meetings on these issues with the industry to further evolve India’s position.

Mr. Chandrashekhar further confirmed that similar to several global national delegations, the government would include media and industry experts as part of its delegation to Dubai, the World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT-12) will be held from December 3 to 14. The final decisions on the ITRs and the composition of the delegation would be announced the coming week.

A deeply divided house in Dubai is a strong possibility, with countries which favour democracy and free speech taking a stance against those who, due to political compulsions, have proposed inter-governmental control through the ITRs by the ITU, not just on Internet policy, but also its traffic and content, most of which automatically fall under the definitions of the ICTs.

The 193-countries at THE WCIT may well spend 11 days discussing national proposals to separate issues that can be addressed nationally from those which require inter-governmental cooperation, while further debating which platforms may be best to address global cooperation.

It is equally clear that the existing Internet governance system is unacceptable to most countries, and therefore a more evolved democratic and internationally equitable system, which is managed through a multi-stakeholder process and yet with a definite role for countries like India, appears the only way forward.

Mr. Sibal, at meetings with global Internet governance bodies in Baku, is learnt to have bargained hard for India’s explicit role in the existing Internet governance processes.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/the-hindu-nov-23-2012-shalini-singh-civil-society-and-industry-oppose-indias-plans-to-modify-itrs

Government Policy and Guidelines

snehashish — 2013-03-15T06:27:26Z

In this unit Snehashish dwells upon the four main policy guidelines that were formulated by the Government of India.

The above were the four main telecom policies formulated by the government.

One of the main functions of DoT is to issue guidelines with respect to issuing of licence, allocation of spectrum, interconnection, etc. These guidelines operate as additional conditions, laid down by DoT with respect to conduct and functioning of telecom operators. For example, the DoT issued guideline for radiation standards in respect of electromagnetic radiations (EMR) for mobile towers, which came into effect on September 1, 2012.

The DoT has issued numerous guidelines across the years. However, it is important to discuss the DoT guidelines with respect to issuance of telecom service licences.

Basic Telephone Services Licences (BTS)
Cellular Mobile Telephone Service Licence (CMTS)
Unified Access Service Licence (UASL)
National Long Distance (NLD) and
International Long Distance Licence (ILD)

Guidelines on issuing of Basic Telephone Services

DoT issued guideline for issuing of BTS licences in January, 2001. The key features of the guidelines are:

The applicant must be an Indian company. There was no restriction on the number of BTS licensees in a circle. The applicants were also required to have a minimum amount of paid up equity capital. This varied from circle to circle. There was a cap of 49 per cent foreign equity on companies applying for the BTS licence
BTS licences were issued for a period of 20 years on a non-exclusive basis
The licences had to pay an entry fee before the grant of the licence. Consequently, the basic telecom service operators had to pay an annual licence fee based on their annual gross revenue
The basic telecom service operators also had to submit two bank guarantee as an assurance to meet the contractual and roll out obligation under the BTS licence
The Guideline also laid down that the license holders can also provide limited mobility services, by using the spectrum allocated to them for last mile delivery. However, service operators provided limited mobility services had to pay additional 2 per cent fee.
The Guidelines declared that a CMTS licensee can also provide fixed services using GSM networks within their service area. *This was done to satisfy cellular operators who were protesting against permission given to the basic telephone operators to provide limited mobility services.
The basic operators could carry intra-circle long distance traffic. However, the operators had to provide the subscribers, the option to choose their own long distance carriers. For this purpose, BTS licensee could enter into an arrangement with the national long distance licensee.
Basic operators were required to make their own arrangements for the installation of infrastructure, network equipment and, right of way. They were also allowed to enter into agreements related to interconnection with other licensee in other service areas. The terms and conditions of such interconnectivity agreement were subject to TRAI regulations and directions.

Guidelines on issuing of Cellular Mobile Telephone Service Licences

The DoT issued Guidelines for CMTS licences along with guidelines for the issuing of the basic telecom licences. These two sets of guidelines are generally similar to each other but they vary in certain issues.

In the light of the criticism of the previous licensing policy, the DoT guidelines on issuing CMTS licence proposed “informed ascending bidding process”[1] for auctioning of CMTS licence.
The CMTS licence was issued for a period of 20 years on a non-exclusive basis, extendable by 10 years.
The licensee can transfer; assign the licence only with the permission of the DoT, the licensor.
The prospective cellular operator had to submit roll-out plans and financial arrangements with the application.
The licence period was set at 20 years, extendable by another 10 years.
The winning bidder had to pay an entry fee. They also had to pay an annual fee which is a percentage of the annual gross revenue.
The cellular operator also had to pay an additional sum for spectrum.
The cellular operator, were given freedom to use any kind of network equipment as long as they satisfied certain international and domestic standards.
The cellular operators were allowed to enter into any interconnection arrangements subject to TRAI regulations.
The guideline also laid down that cellular operators will fully co-operate with law enforcement and government agencies in providing access to their infrastructure.
The licensees have to make their own arrangement for installing infrastructure and equipment and for right of way.

Guidelines for issuing Unified Access Service Licences

The UASL Guidelines were issued in November, 2003. They were consistent with the TRAI recommendations. Option was given to the existing licensees to continue under their basic telecom and cellular mobile telecom licences or migrate to the new unified access service licence regime. The main highlights of the Guidelines on issuing of UASL were:

Cellular licensees can offer limited mobility service within their short distance coverage areas.
Basic telecom service operators had to pay an entry fee for the UASL which was equal to the entry fee paid by the fourth cellular operator for the specific service area or the entry fee paid by the basic telecom provider in that circle, whichever is higher.
No additional entry fee had to be paid by the cellular mobile service providers.
The basic telecom service operator, who choose not to completely migrate to full mobility regime may pay additional licence fee for providing services in wireless in local loop (WLL). However, such service will be restricted to the short distance charging areas.
There was no additional spectrum allotted to the licensee for migrating to the UASL regime.
The unified access service providers can use any technology without any restrictions.

Additional Entry fee to be paid by the existing Basic Service Operators for migration to Unified Access Service License[2]

S.No.	Name of the operator	Service Area of the basic service operator (BSO)	Date of signing of licence agreements	Entry fee paid by BSO (in crores)	Entry fee paid by 4^th cellular operator(in crores)	Additional entry fee to be paid for migration to UASL(in crores)
1.	Reliance Infocomm Ltd.	Rajasthan	20.7.2001	20	32.25	12.25
		UP(East)	20.7.2001	15	45.25	30.25
		Maharashtra	20.7.2001		189+203.66*
				115	392.66	277.66
		Karnataka	20.7.2001	35	206.83	171.83
		Punjab	20.7.2001	20	151.75	131.75
		Andhra Pradesh	20.7.2001	35	103.01	68.01
		Haryana	20.7.2001	10	21.46	11.46
		Kerala	20.7.2001	20	40.54	20.54
		Uttar Pradesh (West)	20.7.2001	15	30.55	15.55
		West Bengal	20.7.2001		0+78.01*
				25	78.01	53.01
		Madhya Pradesh	20.7.2001	20	17.4501	0
		Bihar	20.7.2001	10
		Himachal Pradesh	20.7.2001	2	1.1	0
		Orissa	20.7.2001	5
		Tamil Nadu	26.9.2001		79+154*
				50	233	183
		Delhi	20.7.2001	50	170.7	120.7
		Andaman & Nicobar **	20.7.2001	1		0
2.	RTL	Gujarat	18.3.1997	179.0859030	109.01	0
3.	Tata Teleservices Ltd.	Gujarat	31.8.2001	40	109.01	69.01
		Karnataka	31.8.2001	35	206.83	171.83
		Andhra Pradesh	4.11.1997	161.47(old)	103.01	0
		Tamil Nadu	31.8.2001		79+154*
				50	233	183
		Delhi	31.8.2001	50	170.7	120.7
4.	TTL (Mah.) Ltd.	Maharashtra	31.8.2001		189+203.66*	-
5.	Bharti Telenet Ltd.	Karnataka	29.10.2001	35	206.83	171.83
		Madhya Pradesh	28.2.1997	35.33 (old)	17.4501	0
		Tamil Nadu	29.10.2001	50	79+154*
					233	183
		Delhi	29.10.2001	50	170.7	120.7
6.	Shyam Telelink	Rajasthan	4.3.1998	29.29(old)	32.25	2.96
7.	HFCL Infotel Ltd.	Punjab	7.11.1997	177.59(old)	151.75	0

Guidelines on issuing of National Long Distance (NLD) Services Licence

The DoT issued guidelines for NLD operations along with the licences. The main aspects of the Guidelines are:

Unlimited entry for carrying inter-circle and intra-circle calls
Total foreign equity of the operator should not exceed 74 per cent.
Private operators had to enter into an agreement with fixed service providers with in a circle for traffic between long distance and short distance charging centres
A timeframe of seven years was set for rolling out services. This timeframe was divided into four phases. If in any of the phases the operator failed to achieve its network coverage target then it would result in encashment and forfeiture of the bank guarantee of that phase
Private operators had to pay an entry fee of 25 million and a financial bank guarantee of Rs. 200 million.
Under the revenue sharing agreement, the DoT would charge maximum 6 per cent revenue generated by the private operator.
Private operators were allowed to set up landing facilities for accessing submarine cables and make use of available excess bandwidth.

Guidelines on issuing of International Long Distance (ILD) Services licences

The DoT issued new guidelines for ILD licences in December, 2005. This was done to implement licence simplification measures and also to allow higher foreign investment. The key features of the Guidelines were:

The ILD service, under the Guidelines was defined as network carriage or bearer service which allows NLD licensees international connectivity to foreign networks
The ILD service provider was allowed to provide all kinds of bearer services from an integrated platform. However, a separate licence was required for satellite and global mobile personal communication services.
The terms for the license: (i) the applicant must be an Indian company; (ii) the company must have net-worth and paid up capital of 2.5 crores; (ii) the total foreign equity should not exceed 74 per cent
The ILD licence was issued for a period of 20 year on a non-exclusive basis, and it would be automatically renewed for another term of five year subject to satisfactory performance.
The entry fee for the ILD licence was Rs. 2.5 crores and an unconditional bank guarantee of the same amount has to be submitted, which could be forfeited subject to failure in fulfilling the roll out obligations. The licensee had to also submit an additional financial bank guarantee of Rs. 20 crores. The ILD operators also had to pay a 6 per cent of the annual adjusted gross revenue as annual licence fee. The Guideline also laid down that an additional fee will be charged for the universal service obligation and use of spectrum
The ILD operator has to submit to the DoT detailed plan of the rollout obligation and also commission at least one gateway switch in order to interconnect with NLD licensees. Such networks must be in conformity with the international and national standards.
For provide ILD services, the operator may obtain leased lines from other access providers.
The ILD operators can provide lower-than-toll quality service, provided that there is no degradation in the quality of services.
The gateway and landing stations may be established. However, this will be subject to security and monitoring requirements.
The ILD operator had to furnish detailed accounts periodically and furnish any such information requested by TRAI.
An ILD operator, must co-operate provide facilities to law enforcement and government agencies for monitoring and surveillance. However, the licensee must also ensure protection of privacy of communication.

[1]. The auction process consisted of three rounds of bidding. A minimum bid price was prescribed for each round. The highest bid in the first round was declared the minimum reserve price in the second round. Subsequently the highest bid in the second round was set as the reserve price in the third round. The lowest bidders in each round were rejected to participate in the next round of bidding.

[2]. Annexure 1, Guidelines for Unified Access (Basic and Cellular) Service Licence, November 11, 2003 available at www.dot.gov.in/uas/Guidelines-Unified_License111103.doc

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/resources/govt-policy-and-guidelines

TRAI Telecommunication Tariff Orders

snehashish — 2013-03-15T07:04:18Z

This section will deal with the Telecommunication Tariff Order, 1999 which was issued by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India, in order to put a cap on the call rates and other allied services.

The Tariff order mandates that transparency is tariff and consumer protection. The Telecommunication Tariff Order, 1999 has gone through numerous amendments due to changes in the technology and the competition in the market. The Telecommunication Tariff Order, 1999 has gone through 53 amendments as on October, 2012. The TRAI also has laid down tariff orders for broadcasting and cable services.

The main highlights of the Telecommunication Tariff Order, 1999 are:

Review of Tariffs: The TRAI has the authority to review and modify the tariff of any telecommunication service.
Standard Package: The telecom service provider has to provide a standard package to all its consumers.
Limits on Tariff: In case there is a specific ceiling on the tariff of a certain telecommunication service, then the service provider has to fix any rate above that ceiling. Similarly, if the TRAI sets a tariff as the floor then the operator cannot provide such service below the rates specified by the authority.
Reporting Requirement: The telecom operator has to report to the TRAI about the introduction of tariff and the changes subsequent to it.
Transparency and Consumer Protection: Tariffs charged by the operators should be published along with the terms and conditions attached to it in a manner as prescribed by the TRAI from time to time. It should also project the tariffs in a comparison table and the charges to be paid by the subscriber vis-a-vis the specified standard packages.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/resources/trai-telecommunication-tariff-orders

Super WiFi & Shared Spectrum: A Time to Start Sharing

Shyam Ponappa — 2012-11-08T07:00:53Z

Look into sharing spectrum and 'Super Wi-Fi', instead of auctions, refarming and exclusive allocation.

Shyam Ponappa's article was published in Organizing India Blogspot on November 3, 2012 and earlier in the Business Standard on November 1, 2012.

Amidst our preoccupation with internal problems of misgovernance, we’re losing track of long-term technical developments elsewhere. For instance, there’s a buzz about “Super Wi-Fi” technology in other countries that's missing in India. Yet this could make spectrum abundant, while avoiding the problems of private allocation. Here’s why India with its floundering, beleaguered telecommunications sector should stay abreast.

Super Wi-Fi using TVWS

The technology for unused TV spectrum bands, or TV White Spaces (TVWS), is referred to as “Super Wi-Fi”, although it doesn’t conform to earlier Wi-Fi standards, nor does it use the 2.4 GHz or 5 GHz licence-exempt spectrum. Super Wi-Fi has its own standards (IEEE 802.22 and 802.11 af) using 470-810 MHz, the “digital dividend” after conversion from analogue broadcast TV. It can be used for long-range rural broadband, and to improve short-range coverage. In the US, where it was pioneered, access is available without a licence to devices registered with a proximate geolocational database. Like regular Wi-Fi, Super Wi-Fi expands the use of available spectrum by sharing access.

The US is also permitting exploration of shared use in defence and security bands from 1755-1850 MHz, extending the potential for sharing spectrum.[1]

TVWS trials

Earlier this month, Singapore’s Infocomm Development Authority organised a workshop on TVWS with government and private entities. Organisers included the Institute for Infocomm Research (IR) and other local participants, with presentations from companies from the US, Europe, Asia, and Africa, including Microsoft, Google, Spectrum Bridge, Adaptrum, Ericsson subsidiary Telcordia, Neul, Japan’s NCIT, and so on.[2] Completed or ongoing trials are shown in the diagram below.

Super WiFi Trials


Source: http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=29678

TVWS and shared spectrum vs refarming

These developments should be of vital interest in India to policy makers, operators and users — not only for TVWS as a shared resource, but as an approach that could be extended to other bands, so that limited spectrum availability doesn’t constrain reasonably priced, high-speed data services. This is a serious limitation in India, unlike in other countries where a few operators have sufficient spectrum; in this sense, the need to share spectrum is much greater in India. For example, sharing could provide a better alternative to refarming of the 900 MHz band, allowing for both 4G and legacy uses.

One difficulty is that dominant operators may oppose sharing because their spectrum holdings provide a competitive advantage: possibly Bharti, Reliance, or an aspirant like Vodafone with access to inexpensive offshore funding. Our collective interests here, however, are likely to be best served not by constraining access through limited, exclusive spectrum, but by making spectrum abundant through sharing, allowing for wide bands (2x20 MHz or 2x40 MHz) that can be aggregated for much higher throughput for data, not just for voice.

For this to happen, (a) the government has to explore spectrum sharing in TVWS as well as in other bands, and (b) stakeholders must be receptive, to co-operate effectively on a workable plan on the lines of revenue sharing after NTP-99, extending to broadband delivery. Everyone will gain: users will get better access, operators can thrive, and the government will collect much more revenue over time. However, dominant operators will need to give up their spectrum for the greater common interest including their own, and for this, they will need compensation — as in production-sharing agreements in the oil sector.

The advantages of spectrum sharing

There are a number of advantages of sharing spectrum. First, and important, it can be non-discriminatory. Second, it avoids private allocation; shared spectrum can be accessed without allocation to private parties. Then there is the fact that capital cost is reduced. There is no deadweight loss from capital tied up in auctions, freeing it all for network development and service delivery. Finally, there’s the general misinformation about auctions, which become academic if spectrum is shared. If spectrum is instead auctioned, the public interest – of users, operators and producers – will be adversely affected. (On producers, while local manufacturing is currently insignificant, there is considerable scope if it is set up right, as telecommunications equipment imports are expected to exceed energy imports in a few years).

The Supreme Court was misinformed about auction fees exceeding revenue-sharing collections, and not informed of its detriments. As evidenced after NTP-99, networks and services proliferated, resulting in much higher collections than auction fees foregone. The Supreme Court’s opinion on the Presidential Reference clarified that auctions were not mandatory for other resources, but not for spectrum, although the reasoning is the same. This needs rectification if spectrum is not shared, because revenue-share collections and tax revenues on profits from more extensive networks and services are likely to far exceed the estimated auction fees of Rs 40,000 crore over three years, quite apart from the major public benefits of access.

Space for constructive decisions

Another requirement for constructive resolution is that policy makers be given the requisite space to frame solutions that are genuinely in the public interest. These solutions can be premised on abundance if it is possible, rather than artificial scarcity and rationing. At present, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India, the Department of Telecommunications, and other authorities including the Empowered Group of Ministers are under immense pressure to favour aggressive government collections, instead of what might be genuinely beneficial. This is an odd consequence of the government’s increasing loss of credibility, resulting in the rise of populists, “profit haters”, and ignorant-yet-opinionated sceptics. Uninformed attacks on constructive approaches and alternatives need to be presented and seen in a more balanced way by an informed media, press and public, instead of being fuelled by indiscriminate hype.

Also, we have to learn to distinguish between problems of ideological conviction – those that can be solved through political accommodation – and engineering problems, like network design and service delivery at least cost. Resorting to political accommodation for engineering requirements results in malfunction and/or collapse.

A good way to proceed is to ensure sharing solutions are worked out without incurring exorbitant cost — not only for TVWS but also for legacy operations, such as in the 900 MHz band. These can induce new network build-outs for data services in urban as well as underserved rural areas, and broadband service delivery across the country.

[1]. Other bands being considered for sharing in the US are:
1695-1710 MHz & 3550-3650 MHz; Unlicensed: 5350-5470 MHz & 5850-5925 MHz. For details, see: http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-57529959-94/defense-department-pushes-spectrum-sharing-as-solution-to-wireless-crunch/
[2]. http://whitespace.i2r.a-star.edu.sg/TVWS_Workshop/Programme.html

Details on the UK (Cambridge) trials at: http://www.cambridgewireless.co.uk/docs/Cambridge White Spaces Trial - technical findings-with higher res pics.pdf

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/blog/organizing-india-blogspot-in-2012-nov-3-2012-shyam-ponappa-super-wifi-shared-spectrum

TRAI Regulations

snehashish — 2013-03-15T06:35:23Z

This section will deal with all regulations issued by TRAI in the course of its functions.

It issues regulations with respect to various aspects of the telecom industry. TRAI regulations generally, deal with:

Interconnection issues (usage charges, agreement, revenues sharing).
Quality of the telecom services.
Consumer protection and redressal of grievance including unsolicited commercial communication.
Access to essential infrastructure such as cable landing stations.
Mobile number portability.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/resources/trai-regulations

Spectrum Management

snehashish — 2013-03-15T07:07:47Z

Snehashish takes us through the entire process of spectrum management — auctioning and allocation process for all kinds of spectrum, the initial process of auctioning, how the bidders are selected, criterion for allocation, time taken to allocate, selection of band, interference issues, spectrum refarming, and spectrum reallocation.

3.5.1. Unit 1: Auctioning and allocating process for all kinds of spectrum
3.5.2. Unit 2: The initial process of auctioning
3.5.3. Unit 3: How are the bidders selected
3.5.4. Unit 4: Criterion for allocation
3.5.5. Unit 5: Time taken to allocate
3.5.6. Unit 6: Selection of band
3.5.7. Unit 7: Interference issues
3.5.8. Unit 8: Spectrum Refarming
3.5.9. Unit 9: Spectrum Reallocation

3.5.1: Auctioning and allocating process for all kinds of spectrum

Auction of spectrums was introduced in the telecommunication market after the failure of the administrative process of allocating spectrum. In auction theory, an auction takes place when there is a seller who wishes to allocate an object to one of ‘n’ buyers.[1] Auctions use a price mechanism to allocate spectrum. Auction of spectrum can be used to increase efficiency and earn maximum revenue. However, auctions of spectrum also have certain drawbacks such as collusion and higher price of telecom services due to high licence fees.

Some of the different types of auction formats are:

First-price sealed bid auction: The highest bidder wins the auction. Such highest bidder pays an amount equal to the bid amount and it is not essential that the bidder with the highest value will place the highest bid. The bid is based on the speculation what other bidders will be bidding.
Second-price sealed bids auction (Vickery auction): This procedure of auction is similar to first price sealed bid auction. The highest bidder wins the auction but he has to pay the price equal to the second highest bid.
Dutch auction: The auctioneer quotes the highest price for the subject matter of the auction and gradually decreases price. The first one to bid for it wins the auction.
English or Japanese auction: In English auction, the auctioneer quotes the minimum price and the buyer bids an amount higher than the minimum price. The bidding is closed when there is no increase in the amount and the highest bidder wins the auction. The other variant of English auction is Japanese auction. In this format, the auctioneer quotes a low price and gradually increases the price which is pre-determined. The bidders should show willingness to buy at the price quoted by the auctioneer. The bidding closes when only one bidder is left, who is willing to buy the object at the price quoted by the auctioneer.

Minimum Reserve Price

The minimum reserve price is generally fixed with the purpose of increasing revenue. Minimum reserve price is the minimum amount which the auctioneer is ready to auction the object for. The computing of minimum reserve price is a complicated affair. The computing of minimum reserve price requires knowledge about the distribution of valuations of bidders.[2]

Beauty Contest

The other mode of allotment of spectrum is through beauty contest. In a beauty contest, generally a committee is constituted which sets a certain standard and requirements which has to be fulfilled for the allocation of the spectrum. Contenders for the spectrum allocation is then evaluated and decided upon an entity which has the best capabilities to carry out functions.

“In the case of spectrum allocation for mobile services, criteria set out beforehand can include general criteria such as financial resources, reliability and investment in research, as well as more specific criteria such as the speed of network rollout, the requirement for geographic and/or population coverage, pricing, quality, technology and competitiveness.”

In case of auction the price mechanism to be implemented is crucial whereas in a beauty contest it is one of the requirements.[3]

3.5.2. & 3.5.3.: The initial process of selection of operators for allocation of spectrum

This selection will explore the changes in the selection process for allocation of spectrum with changes in the policy. This will look at

Auctioning of spectrum under the National Telecom Policy, 1994
Bundling of spectrum with the service licence
Delinking of spectrum from the licence and return to the auction format for allocation of licence

India had an early start in the field of auctioning of spectrum. Initially, under the 1994 policy, spectrum was included within the telecom licence. The licences were auctioned by the Department of Telecommunication, the incumbent regulator, policy maker and enforcer.

The National Telecom Policy, 1994, acknowledged the fact that it was not possible for the Government, alone to achieve targets under the Policy and there was a need for private participation. As a result, in 1995, the Government invited bids for private investment through a competitive process in the field of basic telecom services sector.

For the implementation of the service the country was divided into 20 circles. It was further categorized in A, B and C on the basis of the potential of the region to generate revenue. The Department of Telecom awarded licences to two operators per service area for cellular mobile telephone services and in case of basic telephone services.

The potential service providers in order to be eligible for bidding for licences had to partner up with a foreign company. It was considered that a standalone Indian company will not have the financial capability and technical know-how to provide cellular/basic telecom services at a large scale.

The bidding was a two stage process for all licences. The first stage was to fulfill the criteria, which was based on the financial net worth of the company (in relation to the category of circle) and the experience of the company in providing telecom services. The second stage was with respect to the valuation of bids. The licence was awarded to the telecom service provider, which has fulfilled the pre-requisites and is the highest bidder for the licence. Single stage bidding process was followed in circles. There were separate licences issued for the four metropolitan cities (Kolkata, Chennai, Mumbai, and New Delhi). The licences were awarded through beauty contest in metros.

The technology preferred for cellular services was GSM and for basic telephone service, a combination of fibre optics and wireless in local loop technology was implemented. In 1995, Government auctioned 2*4.4. MHz of startup spectrum for the GSM based mobile services.

Drawbacks in the mechanism of issuing telecom licence

The problem which arose due to the implementation of the above model is that multiple licences were awarded to a single entity. A single company was able to secure licences for nine circles and had a very high bid. This created problems as to the ability of the company to pay the licence amount for all the circles. In figures the annual turnover of the company was $0.06 billion where as the estimated licence fee was $15 billion. There were also concerns with respect to replacing the public monopoly on telecom services with a private one. In order to counter these problems the Government changed its policy and allowed the winning bidder to choose 3 circles out of the nine circles. There was rebidding in 15 circles with the government specifying a reserve price. This was due to the change in policy as the highest bidder was not able to operate in more than 3 circles. The response to this was very poor and it was perceived by the bidders that the reserve price was too steep.

Spectrum Management under New Telecom Policy, 1999

The policy on spectrum management under the NTP, 1999:

With the immense growth in new technologies there has been an increase in demand for telecommunication services. This has led to increase in demand for spectrum and therefore it is necessary that the spectrum should be utilized efficiently, economically, rationally and optimally.
Transparent process of allocation of frequency spectrum.
Revision of the National Frequency Allocation Plan (NFAP) and such a Plan to be made public by the end of year 1999. The NFAP will detail information about allocation of frequency bands.
NFAP is to be reviewed no later than every two years and it should be in tune with regulation under the International Telecommunication Union.
Adequate spectrum should be available, to meet the increase in need of telecommunication services.
Revision of spectrum allocation, in a planned manner in order to make available required frequency bands to the service providers.
Allocation of spectrum of frequency should be in conformity with the ITU guidelines. The following action will be adopted:

Spectrum usage fee shall be charged
Inter-Ministerial Group to be constituted, it will be known as Wireless Planning Coordination Committee. It will be a part of the Ministry of Communication for the purpose of review of spectrum availability.
Computerization of WPC wing

Implementation of the Spectrum Management Policy under NTP, 1999

With the advent of the 1999 Policy, cellular mobile service providers were allowed to provide all kinds of mobile services (voice, non-voice messages, data services and PCOs), which would utilize any type of network equipment that meets the ITU/TEC (International Telecommunication Union/ Telecommunication Engineering Centre) standards. It is also to be noted that the mandate of only using GSM was done away with and the cellular licence was made technology neutral. The New Telecom Policy, 1999 allowed the migration of the licensees from a Fixed Licensee Fee Regime to a Revenue Arrangement Scheme (w.e.f. 1/08/1999). The National Telecom Policy also laid down that the licences will be awarded for a period of 20 years and it can be extended for a period of another 10 years. The Government entered the telecom market as the third mobile operator. It granted licence to MTNL in 1997 for two metros (Delhi and Mumbai). In 2000, cellular mobile operator licence was granted to BSNL, as the third operator for all areas except Mumbai and Delhi. The 900 MHz band was given to the government operator on a pro-bono basis. In 2001, a fourth cellular mobile service operator was allowed in the telecom sector. The licence for the fourth operator was issued through a three stage auction. A start-up spectrum of 2*4.4 MHz in 1800 MHz was allotted to the winner of the auction. The licensees were also required to pay a percentage of annual revenue as spectrum charge. This was collected in addition to the entry fees.[6]

The other licences which were rolled out under the NTP, 1999 are licences for National Long Distance Service operators (without any bar on number of operators), International Long Distance Service and Internet Service Providers.

Unified Access Service Licence

In 2003, TRAI proposed a Unified Licensing Regime which was introduced by the Government in November, 2003. The unified access service licence “permitted an access service provider to offer both fixed and/or mobile services under the same licence, using any technology.” [8] An entry fee was charged, which was based on the bid price paid by the fourth mobile operator.[9]

The TRAI reviewed the spectrum allocation process in the year 2005. It took into account spectrum availability and also considered efficient techniques for the utilization of already allocated spectrum. The consultation paper prepared by the TRAI in 2005 stated that the spectrums allocated by the GSM and CDMA operators are well below the international averages. TRAI recommended that the existing operators should be allocated sufficient spectrum before allocating spectrum to new service providers.

Allocation of 3G and Broadband Wireless Spectrum

Spectrum for 3G and Broadband Wireless Access (BWA) was auctioned using the simultaneous ascending auction process. It involved a two stage process. A clock stage in order to indentify the winner for each circle which was followed by a assignment stage, for identification of specific frequency band. The auction of spectrum for 3G and BWA generated a gross revenue of Rs. 106262 crores for the Department of Telecom, across the 22 telecom circles.

3.5.4 & 3.5.6.: Selection of Band and Criterion for further allocation of spectrum

This section will go into the details of the allocation of specific bandwidth across various frequency bands and also analyze the change in allocation criterion for allocation of spectrum. This will also look at the process of allocation followed by India which has been quite different from the international practices due to hoarding of spectrum by the defense forces. It will also bring out the concern showed by TRAI as to scarcity of spectrum and shortcomings in the allocation of spectrum as compared to the international practices.

Start-up Allocation of Spectrum (1995- 2001)

Before the liberalization of the telecom sector, the bandwidth intended for commercial exploitation was under the control of the Defence forces in India. This consisted of 800 MHz, 1800 MHz and 1900 MHz frequency bands. The commercial exploitation of the spectrum started with the grant of the Cellular Mobile Telephone services in the metro cities.

As discussed in Module 3.5.1(add link), the first round of auction of spectrum was for two CMTS licences in each circles. The DoT auctioned 2*4.4 MHz (paired frequency division duplex spectrum assignment) for GSM technology in the frequency band of 890-915 MHz paired with 935-960 MHz in each circle.

Subsequently, the Government entered the market as the third cellular operator in the 2001. A bandwidth of 2*4.4 was allocated to the start up government cellular operators free of charge in the 900 MHz band. The fourth cellular operator entered the market in 2001 and a start up spectrum of bandwidth 2*4.4 MHz was allocated to the operators in the frequency band 1710-1785 MHz paired with 1805-1880 MHz.

The Department of Telecom also allowed further allocation of spectrum apart from the start up spectrum allocations. This was based on the availability and justification provided by the operator for allocation of more bandwidth. In 2002, the Department of Telecom introduced the Subscriber Based Criterion for the allocation of spectrum. According to this criterion, surplus spectrum would be allocated to the operator, with a certain amount of subscriber base. This was followed by allocation of 2*12.5 MHz bandwidth to each operator within each circle.

However, this method of allocation of spectrum was totally different from the allocation of spectrum in the other countries. A sizeable bandwidth of 2*15 MHz was allocated as start-up spectrum in various countries. This was not the case in India and the Department of Telecom cited that due to non-availability and hoarding of spectrum by defence such a policy had to be adopted.

Table 1: Allocation of Spectrum on the basis of the “Subscriber Based Criterion”, 2002

Quantum of Spectrum Allotted	Minimum Subscriber Base Required (in millions)	Annual Spectrum Charges (per cent of the adjusted gross revenue)
2*4.4 MHz	-	2
2*6.2 MHz	-	3
2*8.0 MHz	0.5	3
2*10 MHz	1.0	4
2*12.5 MHz	1.2	5

*Source: Vardharajan Sridhar, The Telecom Revolution in India: Technology, Policy and Regulation, Oxford University Press, 2012, pp. 112

Post UASL Regime (2003-2005)

After the implementation of the Unified Access Service Licence, the basic telecom service operators were allowed to provide full mobility service for a payment of a entry fee which was equivalent to that paid by the fourth cellular operator. However, such operators migrating to UASL regime were not promised any start up spectrum but it would allocate as and when available.

Review of Spectrum Allocation Process by TRAI and setting up of new Subscriber Base Criterion (2006-2008)

TRAI reviewed the spectrum allocation process in 2005 with the intent to account for unused spectrum and optimum and efficient utilization of scarce resource such as spectrum. The TRAI found that the maximum spectrum allocated to an operator is 2*10 MHz whereas the international average is around 2*20 MHz.

The main problem faced by allocation of spectrum was due to use of spectrum by defence forces and the railways.

Ministry of Defence and Railways uses sizeable portion of the 900 MHz frequency band for navigation and other purposes. It also uses the 1900 MHz band. The Defence Forces utilize 2*20 bandwidth at 1880-1900 MHz paired with 1970-1990 MHz for fixed wireless local loop technology.
The 1900 MHz could not be utilized because the Air Force uses the frequency band.

The TRAI also commented that in the 800 MHz band only a maximum of 2*5 MHz had been allocated to the CDMA operators whereas the world average standards stand at 2*15 MHz for CDMA operations.

The TRAI while observing that the allocation of the spectrum for both GSM and CDMA operators was way below international average spectrum allocation standards recommended that the existing service operators should be provided with more spectrum than before allowing new players to enter the market as there was already a fair amount of competition in the market.

The 2006, TRAI Recommendations on implementation 3G, noted that the Ministry of Defence will vacate 2*20 MHz frequency band in the 1800 MHz band along with 25 MHz in the 2.1 GHz UMTS band. In its recommendation TRAI suggested that the additional spectrum vacated by the defence forces in the 1800 MHz band should be allocated to the operators providing 2G services and it specifically recommended that the Department of Telecom should not treat the allocation of 3G spectrum as a continuation of 2G spectrum allocation.

TRAI recommendations in 2007 suggested that there should not be any limitation on the number of players in the telecom sector. The grant of new licences resulted in a list of license holders who were to be assigned spectrum as and when available. TRAI in its 2007 recommendation noted that the spectrum allocation criteria should be formulated in such a manner so that maximum and efficient utilization of the spectrum can be achieved. This led to the tightening of the Subscriber Base Criterion previously laid down by the DoT (Table 1).

Quantum of Spectrum Allotted	Minimum Subscriber Base Required (in millions)	Annual Spectrum Charges (percentage of the adjusted gross revenue)
For GSM Services
2*4.4 MHz	-	2
2*6.2 MHz	0.5 – 0.8	3
2*7.2 MHz	1.5 – 3.0
2*8.2 MHz	1.8 – 4.1	3
2*9.2 MHz	2.1 – 5.3
2*10.2 MHz	2.6 – 6.8	4
2*11.2 MHz	3.2 – 6.8
2*12.2 MHz	4.0 – 9.0	5
2*14.2 MHz	5.7 – 10.7	5
2*15 MHz	6.5 – 11.6	6
For CDMA Services
2*3.75 MHz	0.15 – 0.40	2
2*5.0 MHz	0.5 – 1.2	2

*Source: Vardharajan Sridhar, The Telecom Revolution in India: Technology, Policy and Regulation, Oxford University Press, 2012, pp. 115

Allocation of 3G Spectrum (2010-Current)

In 2008, the Department of Telecom announced its policy on 3G mobile services. Pursuant to the 2006 TRAI Recommendations on Allocation and pricing of spectrum for 3G and Broadband Wireless Access, the Department of Telecom decided on a simultaneous ascending auction for allocation of spectrum. According to the recommendation, the Department of Telecom would allot 2*5 MHz bandwidth in the 2.1 GHz band.

3.5.5.: Time taken to allocate

This section will look at the issues with respect to time taken by the Department of Telecom to allocate spectrum to the winning bidders. The Department of Telecom on various occasions has delayed the process of assigning specific frequency bands after allocation of spectrum. This has in turn resulted in delay in rolling out of services by the telecom operators.

There has been substantive delay in allocation of spectrum due to various other reasons, which has been listed in the Report on Examination of Appropriateness of Procedures followed by Department of Telecommunications in Issuance of Licences and Allocation of Spectrum during the Period 2001- 2009. However, according to the Report, the main reasons for the delay are:

Deviation from laid down procedures
Inappropriate application of laid down procedures
Violation of underlying principles of laid down procedures[9]

For instance:

Ongoing litigation with respect to allocation of spectrum
During the first instance of allocation of spectrum for the metro cellular licences; the process was marred by litigation which resulted in delay in allocation of spectrum. Subsequently, there was delay in rolling out of service and the operators suffered huge losses and most of the telecom companies were rendered bankrupt.
Lack of availability/co-ordination with the defence for vacation of spectrum
Initial as well as additional spectrum was allocated as per availability. Such delays were sometime more than a year, which amounted in not only loss of profit for the licence holder but also huge losses in revenue for the Department of Telecom.
Delay in processing of application
For example in allocation of additional spectrum for Idea Cellular Limited in the Maharashtra Service Area, there was a delay of four months given that co-ordination with the Defence was done by December 10, 2004. Spectrum was only allocated by April 1, 2005.

3.5.7. Interference issues

This section will deal with the issues regarding interference in the telecommunication sector. Interference can be defined as noise or unwanted signals which are received by a reception device while receiving the wanted signals. Interference causes degradation of quality of service in the telecommunication.

There is no specific policy in India which deals with interference issues. Interference issues in the telecom sector in India, is generally addressed by Wireless Monitoring Organization which functions under the Wireless Planning Coordination Committee. Telecom operator licences also carries covenant which states:

"The licensee shall not cause or allow causing harmful interference to other authorized users of radio spectrum. For elimination of harmful interference to other user, licensee shall abide by all instructions and orders issued by the Government."[10]

Under the Use of low power Equipment in the frequency band 2.4 GHz to 2.4835 GHz (Exemption from Licensing Requirement) Rules, 2005, interference is defined as, "The effect of unwanted energy due to one or a combination of emissions, radiations or induction upon reception in a radio communication system, manifested by any performance degradation, misinterpretation, or loss of information which could be extracted in the absence of such unwanted energy."[11]

A licensee can approach the Wireless Monitoring Organization (WMO) and lodge a complaint if such operator is facing problems due to interference with other radio signals. In such a circumstance the WMO, enquires in to the matter and finds the source of interference addresses the issues accordingly. The WMO also has wireless monitoring stations which look in to and investigates any issue related interference. The WMO has introduced mobile monitoring vans to effectively find out the source of signals causing interference. The wireless monitoring stations intercepts the interfering signal to determine the source of the signal.

3.5.8. & 3.5.9.: Spectrum Refarming and Spectrum Reallocation

This section will look at the process of refarming of spectrum and also analyze the current (2012) debates on spectrum refarming in India.

Refarming of spectrum is defined as a process which is used to bring about any basic change in the use of different frequency band in the radio spectrum. This can be due to

Change in technology
Change in application and used of the frequency band
Change in Government policy on allocation of spectrum.

Refarming of spectrum entails freeing up of spectrum which is in use and reallocation of such spectrum for some other purpose. It can happen due to change in technology which allows more efficient use of spectrum and hence results in vacation of spectrum. The two main instruments which effects spectrum refarming and reallocation are

Market Driven
Policy or Regulation Driven

Market Driven

A need for spectrum refarming may arise due to the changes in the market such a entry of new players in the market. A market driven refarming and reallocation will take in to consideration financial and business related factors. For example a new entrant in the telecom market will always welcome refarming of spectrum in the 800 MHz or 900 MHz because it will bring down the infrastructure costs incurred by the new player in the market.[12]

Policy or Regulation Driven

The policy driven change is an administrative changes. The main aspects which are taken into consideration by the policy maker or regulator are:

Market Structure: The regulator may implement refarming of spectrum to allow refarming and reallocation of spectrum for facilitating competition in the market. The regulator has to take into consideration the costs incurred by the telecom operators or users of the spectrum for relocating to a different frequency band.
Access: The regulator may allow refarming of spectrum in order to implement new technologies which allows for better access and efficient use of spectrum.
Revenue: The regulator may consider refarming and reallocation of spectrum in order to earn revenue and also allow equity in distribution of spectrum. Spectrum being a scarce resource has to be judiciously allocated by the regulator. Spectrum which was previously allocated for almost two decade ago holds more value in the market due to change in technology as well as the market structure. Therefore, in order to earn revenue the government may refarm and reallocate spectrum.

The main challenge with respect to refarming and reallocation of spectrum is that who will bear the cost for such changes in the spectrum usage and allocation and the transition to a different frequency band. Normally, such a change in spectrum usage is compensated by the:

Telecom companies who have to re-buy the spectrum at a higher price
New telecom companies
Government may set up a refarming fund for such reallocation from the spectrum revenue. For example, such a fund exists in France and it is managed by the Agence Nationale Des Fréquences. (National Frequency Agency).

Refarming and Reallocation in India

According to TRAI in its Recommendation Auction of Spectrum, 2012 discusses the concept of spectrum refarming and states:

"Refarming of spectrum involves re-planning and reassigning of spectrum over a period of time for services with higher value. A key motive for refarming of spectrum is to use the refarmed frequency bands for communications services that yield greater economic or social benefit than existing use as well as to enable the introduction of new or emerging technologies." (para 2.6)

Previously the TRAI in its Recommendation on Licensing Framework and Spectrum Management, 2010 had pointed out that 800 MHz and 900 MHz should be refarmed for use of new technology (UMTS 900), which would allow more efficient use of the spectrum.

In the 2012 Recommendation, TRAI has made detailed suggestions by taking into consideration international practices, different methodologies of refarming of spectrum and comments from the stakeholders. The main recommendations are:

Spectrum in the 900 MHz band is a valuable asset both technologically and economically. Use of 900 MHz spectrum should be liberalized and restriction on the use of technology in the licence should be done away with.
It advises the government to take back 900 MHz from the licensees, who were granted licence in 1994-1995 and the two government operators. These licensees should be granted licence for liberalized spectrum at 1800 MHz frequency band at a price relevant in November, 2014
It also recommended that the 1800 MHz is not completely open for commercial exploitation and the government agencies should vacate the frequency band for successful refarming of 900 MHz.
The licence holder in the 800 MHz band should be reallocated to 1900 MHz band and it strongly recommends that the government should make immediate arrangements to refarm 800 MHz and reallocate licence holder to the 1900 MHz band.

Recently in October, 2012, The Telecom Commission under the Department of Telecom has also recommended refarming of all spectrum used by the telecom companies in the 900 MHz frequency bands during the next phase of renewal of licence. The Commission’s recommendation implies that the complete 900 MHz band has to be reallocated.

In the light of the above recommendation, the telecom companies will have the option of shifting from 900 MHz to 1800 MHz, for which auctions are happening in 2012m or it can bid for 900 MHz auctions schedule to happen in early 2013.These recommendations, if implemented may result in huge investments by the telecom companies and would affect the end users. In 2012, the minimum reserve for auction of 1800 MHz spectrum is set at Rs. 14000 crores and the minimum reserve price for auction of 900 MHz would be twice the amount. The existing licence holder in the 900 MHz band, who migrate to the 1800 MHz band would have not only make huge investment to procure spectrum but also have to install 1.5 times more cell sites to ensure adequate coverage. This would result in further investment and in turn affect the tariff rates.

However, this has been welcomed by the new players in the market, who will have the opportunity to bid for 900 MHz spectrum band which economically and technologically more viable and if liberalized it can also introduce new technologies such as UMTS 900 which would ensure better utilization of the spectrum.

Therefore, it is quite evident that the main challenge so far has been who is liable to compensate for refarming and reallocation. On one hand refarming will ensure deployment of new technology and efficient use of spectrum and also create level playing field for all the telecom companies on the other hand, reallocation or re-auction of spectrum would hit the incumbent telecom companies.

Bibliography

TRAI Recommendations and Consultations available at http://trai.gov.in
Ashok V. Desai, India’s telecommunications industry: history, analysis and diagnosis, Sage Publications India Pvt. Ltd., 2006
Vikram Raghavan, Communications Law in India (Legal Aspects of Telecom, Broadcasting and Cable Services), Lexis Nexis Butterworths, 2007
Varadharajan Sridhar, The Telecom Revolution in India: Technology, Regulation and Policy, Oxford University Press, 2012

Notes
[1]. Andrea Prat, Tommaso Valletti, Spectrum Auctions versus Beauty Contests: Costs and Benefits, Prepared for the OECD - Working Party on Telecommunications and Information Services Policies, (First draft - November 2000) available at http://istituti.unicatt.it/economia_impresa_lavoro_OECD-draft.pdf (last visited on 7/06/2012).
[2]. Consultation Paper on Auction of Spectrum , Telecom Regulatory Authority of India, (7^th March, 2012) available at http://www.trai.gov.in/WriteReaddata/ConsultationPaper/Document/consultation paper spectrum of auction.pdf (last visited on 4/6/2012).
[3]. Id.
[4]. Rohit Prasad and V. Sridhar, A Critique of Spectrum Management in India, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 43, No. 38 (Sep. 20 - 26, 2008), pp. 13-17.
[5]. See, R.S. Jain, Spectrum auctions in India: lessons from experience, Telecommunications Policy 25 (2001) 671–688 available at http://rru.worldbank.org/Documents/PapersLinks/spectrum_auctions_india.pdf (last visited on 05/06/2012) "The bidders could apply for any number of service areas, subject to the fulfillment of the specified entry conditions. The existing licensees could not bid for the same service area. Rollout obligations would be imposed on the winning bidders such as covering at least 10% of the district headquarters in the first year and 50 percent within 3 years of the effective date of the license. Having been criticized for the single round highest bid mechanism that caused inflated licence fee in earlier rounds, the government produced a bidding process which it called the informed ascending bidding process. The bidding process would have three rounds. The highest pre-qualified offer in the first financial bid would be treated as the reserve price for subsequent rounds of bidding. The lowest bidder in any round would not be allowed to participate in the next round, provided there were four or more bidders in any round. In case there were only two short listed bidders, both would qualify. The highest bidder in the third round would be declared successful for the grant of a licence."
[6]. Id.
[7]. Recommendations on Spectrum Management and Licensing Framework, TRAI, 11th May, 2010
[8]. Supra note iv at pp.14, "The fixed fee based licence (as opposed to auction based) theoretically allowed any number of mobile licences to be provided and implicitly de- linked spectrum allocation from licensing."
[9]. Justice Shivraj V. Patil (Former Judge, Supreme Court of India), Report on Examination of Appropriateness of Procedures followed by Department of Telecommunications in Issuance of Licences and Allocation of Spectrum during the Period 2001- 2009. (One man committee report), Published on January 31, 2011, pp. 100 available at http://www.dot.gov.in/miscellaneous/OMC/report.pdf
[10]. Clause 43.6, Licence Agreement for Provision of Unified Access Services after Migration from CMTS.
[11]. Rule 5, Use of low power Equipment in the frequency band 2.4 GHz to 2.4835 GHz (Exemption from Licensing Requirement) Rules, 2005
[12].Lower frequencies bands such as 800 MHz or 900 MHz have a greater wavelength and covers larger areas as opposed to higher frequency bands such 1800 MHz or 2.1 GHz. Therefore the telecom company with lower frequency spectrum has to set up less telecom infrastructure to provide adequate network coverage.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/resources/spectrum-management

October 2012 Bulletin

praskrishna — 2012-11-08T11:42:01Z

Welcome to the newsletter of October 2012 from the Centre for Internet & Society (CIS). The present issue features an analysis by Ujwala Uppaluri of the Delhi High Court’s judgment in Super Cassettes v. MySpace, announcement of public call for comments for reports on “Banking and Accessibility in India” and “Making TV Accessible in India”, and updates on Indic languages.

Jobs
CIS is seeking applications the posts of Research Manager and Programme Officer – Internet Governance. To apply send your resume to sunil@cis-india.org.

HasGeek HasGeek creates discussion spaces for geeks and has organised conferences like the Fifth Elephant, Droidcon India 2011, Android Camp, etc. HasGeek is supported by CIS and works out from CIS office in Bengaluru. The following event was organised by HasGeek in the month of October: Droidcon 2012 (CIS, Bangalore, October 27 – 28, 2012).
Accessibility India has an estimated 70 million disabled persons who are unable to read printed materials due to some form of physical, sensory, cognitive or other disability. The disabled need accessible content, devices and interfaces facilitated via copyright law and electronic accessibility policies: Public Call for Comments Banking and Accessibility in India: A Study on Banking Accessibility in India (by Vrinda Maheshwari, October 30, 2012). Making TV Accessible in India (by Srividya Vaidyanathan, October 8, 2012). Blog Entries The HathiTrust Judgment and its impact on TVI negotiations at WIPO (by Rahul Cherian, October 30, 2012). WIPO General Assemblies Approve Road Map on Treaty for the Visually Impaired (by Rahul Cherian, October 11, 2012).
Access to Knowledge The Access to Knowledge programme addresses the harms caused to consumers, developing countries, human rights, and creativity/innovation from excessive regimes of copyright, patents, and other such monopolistic rights over knowledge: Analysis Super Cassettes v. MySpace (by Ujwala Uppaluri, October 31, 2012). Blog Entry ICOMM2012: International Communications and Electronics Fair (by Jadine Lannon, October 31, 2012). Event Organised A Workshop on "Exploring the Internals of Mobile Technologies" (TERI Southern Regional Centre 4th Main, Domlur II Stage Bangalore, October 27, 2012).
Openness The 'Openness' programme critically examines alternatives to existing regimes of intellectual property rights, and transparency and accountability. Under this programme, we study Open Government Data, Open Access to Scholarly Literature, Open Access to Law, Open Content, Open Standards, and Free/Libre/Open Source Software: Wikipedia Education Programs Launch of Assamese Wikipedia Education Program at Guwahati University (by Nitika Tandon, October 22, 2012). Malayalam Wikipedia Education Program: August to October Updates (by Shiju Alex, October 29, 2012). Gujarat Wikipedia Education Program: Rajkot (by Noopur Raval, October 31, 2012). Gujarati Wikipedia Article Competition – 10 schools, 200 students, 20 articles on Gujarati Wikipedia (by Noopur Raval, October 31, 2012). Wikipedia Workshops Bengaluru: A Hub for Kannada and Sanskrit Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects! (by Subhashish Panigrahi, October 16, 2012). Wikipedia workshop @ Inmantec College, Ghaziabad (by Nitika Tandon, October 19, 2012). Bridging Gender Gap in Pune: WikiWomenDay 2012 Celebrated with Success! (by Subhashish Panigrahi, PAI International Learning Solutions, Azam Campus, Pune, October 28, 2012). First Pune Odia Wikipedia Organized! (by Subhashish Panigrahi, October 31, 2012). Wikipedia Event Wikipedia Hackathon at BITS Hyderabad (organized by CIS - A2K team and BITS-Pilani, Hyderabad, October 26 – 27, 2012). Wikipedia Press Coverage Odisha: Odia Wikipedia workshop organized in Pune to promote Odia language (OdishaDiary.com, October 31, 2012). Wikipedia Team Updates The A2K team consists of three members based in Delhi: Nitika Tandon, Subhashish Panigrahi and Noopur Raval. We are seeking applications for the post of Programme Director (Access to Knowledge) for the New Delhi office. Shiju Alex, Program Manager, Access to Knowledge is leaving the organisation. November 16, 2012 will be his last working day. We wish him success in all his future endeavours.
Internet Governance The Internet Governance programme conducts research around the various social, technical, and political underpinnings of global and national Internet governance, and includes online privacy, freedom of speech, and Internet governance mechanisms and processes: Column Rethinking DNA Profiling in India (by Elonnai Hickok, Economic & Political Weekly, Vol - XLVII No. 43, October 27, 2012). Analysis Privacy Perspectives on the 2012 -2013 Goa Beach Shack Policy (by Elonnai Hickok, October 25, 2012). Upcoming IGF Events At the seventh annual IGF meeting to be held in Baku, Azerbaijan in November 2012, CIS is organising one workshop: National IG Mechanisms – Looking at Some Key Design Issues (co-organising with Brazilian Internet Steering Committee, Institute for System Analysis, Russian Academy of Sciences, et.al., November 8, 2012 from 2.30 p.m. to 4.00 p.m). Pranesh Prakash is a panelist in the following workshop: New Trends in Industry Self-Governance (organised by Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford, UK and Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ, University of Zurich, Switzerland and Nominet, UK, November 7, 2012 from 4.30 p.m. to 6.00 p.m). CIS fellow Malavika Jayaram is a panelist for these workshops: Civil rights in the digital age, about the impact the Internet has on civil rights (organised by ECP on behalf of the IGF-NL, November 7, 2012, 4.30 p.m. to 6.00 p.m.). Governing Identity on the Internet (organised by Brenden Kuerbis, Citizen Lab and Christine Runnegar, Internet Society, November 8, 2012, 11.00 a.m. to 12.30 p.m.). Other Upcoming Event DML Conference 2013 (Sheraton Chicago Hotel & Towers - Chicago, Illinois, March 14 – 16, 2012): CIS and Digital Media & Learning Research Hub Central are jointly organizing the DML Conference 2013 in Chicago. Event organised The Public Voice: Privacy Rights are a Global Challenge (Punta del Este, Uruguay, October 21, 2012): Malavika Jayaram was a speaker at this event. Events Participated 3rd Worldwide Cybersecurity Summit (organised by EastWest Institute in partnership with NASSCOM and FICCI, Federation House, New Delhi, October 30-31, 2012): Sunil Abraham and Elonnai Hickok participated in this event. Fourth Annual Legal Services Conference in India (organised by US India Business Council, New Delhi, October 11, 2012): Pranesh Prakash was a panelist in the session on “Censorship and Content Restrictions: The Future of Internet Speech in India”. Meeting on Lawful Access by Law Enforcement (Brussels, October 3 – 5, 2012): Elonnai Hickok participated in the meeting. Video Arrested for tweeting: Legitimate or Curbing Free Speech? (NDTV, October 31, 2012): Sunil Abraham participated in this discussion aired on NDTV along with Shivam Vij, SB Mishra and Sanjay Pinto. Media Coverage On social media, Modi goes soft (by Zia Haq, Hindustan Times, October 26, 2012): Sunil Abraham is quoted. Bolstering right to remain private (by Apar Gupta, The Pioneer, October 29, 2012): Pranesh Prakash is quoted. CIS was part of the expert committee even though not explicitly mentioned in these: Panel suggests law to protect individual privacy (Newstrack India, October 18, 2012), Privacy law mooted to protect people against misuse of info (Business Standard, October 18, 2012), Experts' committee moots law to protect privacy (by Saikat Datta, Daily News & Analysis, October 19, 2012), Govt panel wants curbs on phone taps (The Times of India, October 19, 2012), Privacy Act should not circumscribe RTI: expert group (by Amitabh Sinha, Indian Express, October 19, 2012), Nine-point code set out to safeguard personal information (Hindu Business Line, October 18, 2012), Privacy law mooted to protect people against misuse of info (Zee News, October 18, 2012). Court’s approval needed to tap phones: Panel (by Surabhi Agarwal, LiveMint, October 18, 2012): Sunil Abraham is quoted. Could better DNA testing facilities in India have saved the Talwars? (by Pallavi Polanki, October 11, 2012): CIS press statement is mentioned.
Telecom While the potential for growth and returns exist for telecommunications in India, a range of issues need to be addressed. One aspect is more extensive rural coverage and the other is a countrywide access to broadband which is low. Both require effective and efficient use of networks and resources, including spectrum: Building Knowledge and Capacity around Telecommunication Policy in India CIS and Ford Foundation joined hands to build expertise in the area of telecommunications in India. Dr. Surendra Pal, Satya N Gupta, Paranjoy Guha Thakurta, Payal Malik, Dr. Rakesh Mehrotra and Dr. Nadeem Akhtar are the expert reviewers. The following are the new outputs: Spectrum Management (by Snehashish Ghosh, October 31, 2012). Cable Television (by Srividya Vaidyanathan, October 16, 2012). Column in Business Standard The Supreme Court Delivers (by Shyam Ponappa in Business Standard, October 4, 2012 and Organizing India Blogspot, October 11, 2012).
Digital Natives Digital Natives with a Cause? examines the changing landscape of social change and political participation in light of the role that young people play through digital and Internet technologies, in emerging information societies. Consolidating knowledge from Asia, Africa and Latin America, it builds a global network of knowledge partners who critically engage with discourse on youth, technology and social change, and look at alternative practices and ideas in the Global South: Newspaper Column The Rules of Engagement (by Nishant Shah, Indian Express, October 29, 2012).
Researchers at Work CIS organised the Habits of Living Workshop in Bangalore from September 26 to 29, 2012. Three columns by Nishant Shah arising from these workshops were published in the month of October: Habits of Living: Being Human in a Networked Society (DML, Central, October 22, 2012). Digital Habits: How and Why We Tweet, Share and Like (FirstPost, October 12, 2012). Who’s that Friend? (Indian Express, October 23, 2012).

About CIS

*Follow us elsewhere*

Get short, timely messages from us on Twitter
Join the CIS group on Facebook
Visit us at http://cis-india.org

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/about/newsletters/october-2012-bulletin

Centre for Internet and Society

What's Needed Is User-Centric Design, Not Good Intentions

Market Structure in the Telecom Industry

Teledensity

Public and Private Share in the Market

Wireless

Wireline

Internet Services

Licensing Framework for Telecom: A Historical Overview

December 2012 Bulletin

Feedback

Media Coverage

Blog Entry

Event Organised

Research for the Global Congress

Event Report

Events Participated

Events Organised

Blog Entries

News / Media Coverage

Videos

Upcoming Event

Analysis of Central Motor Vehicle Rules

Columns/Op-eds

Event Organised

Upcoming Events

Events Participated

Blog Entries

Video

Media Coverage

Newspaper Column

Book Review

Media Coverage

Inflation Control Through Structural Reforms

DoT — Its Powers and Responsibilities

November 2012 Bulletin

Pervasive Technologies: Access to Knowledge in the Marketplace

Access to Knowledge Programme

HasGeek

Media Coverage

Videos

Folly of Mandating Spectrum Auctions

Contrary Positions

Alternatives to Auctions

Courts and Policy

Civil society & industry oppose India’s plans to modify ITRs

Government Policy and Guidelines

Guidelines on issuing of Basic Telephone Services

Guidelines on issuing of Cellular Mobile Telephone Service Licences

Guidelines for issuing Unified Access Service Licences

Guidelines on issuing of National Long Distance (NLD) Services Licence

Guidelines on issuing of International Long Distance (ILD) Services licences

TRAI Telecommunication Tariff Orders

Super WiFi & Shared Spectrum: A Time to Start Sharing

Super Wi-Fi using TVWS

TVWS trials

Super WiFi Trials

TVWS and shared spectrum vs refarming

The advantages of spectrum sharing

Space for constructive decisions

TRAI Regulations

Spectrum Management

3.5.1: Auctioning and allocating process for all kinds of spectrum

Minimum Reserve Price

Beauty Contest

3.5.2. & 3.5.3.: The initial process of selection of operators for allocation of spectrum

Drawbacks in the mechanism of issuing telecom licence

Spectrum Management under New Telecom Policy, 1999

Implementation of the Spectrum Management Policy under NTP, 1999

Unified Access Service Licence

Allocation of 3G and Broadband Wireless Spectrum

3.5.4 & 3.5.6.: Selection of Band and Criterion for further allocation of spectrum

Start-up Allocation of Spectrum (1995- 2001)

Post UASL Regime (2003-2005)

Review of Spectrum Allocation Process by TRAI and setting up of new Subscriber Base Criterion (2006-2008)

Allocation of 3G Spectrum (2010-Current)

3.5.5.: Time taken to allocate

3.5.7. Interference issues

3.5.8. & 3.5.9.: Spectrum Refarming and Spectrum Reallocation

Market Driven

About CIS