Centre for Internet and Society

Mobile Television

Tina Mani — 2013-03-15T08:56:35Z

In this chapter, Tina Mani tells us about DVB-H technology, MBMS technology and combining satellite television with mobile.

What is Mobile Television?

Mobile Television, as the name suggests, is the ability to view regular television channels over your mobile.

Mobile Television – Broadcast – DVB-H

Traditional Television uses a broadcast medium, i.e., different channels are played out from one source and all the listeners of a channel tune in to the particular channel frequency. Keeping the same philosophy, standards like DVB-H evolved from the broadcasting world, to allow viewership on the mobile by tuning into the channel. The DVB-H technology did not take off worldwide mainly because of the high upfront investment in infrastructure and because a separate radio network had to be built exclusively for this purpose. Also the technology was dependent on support in the handsets, which needed an additional radio. Nokia tried to solve the problem by launching a DVB-H antenna accessory that could plug into any Nokia phone and make it DVB-H enabled, but by the time they launched this, the technology was more or less dead.

In India, Doordarshan launched DVB-H on a trial basis in some areas around Akashwani Bhavan in Delhi. This service can be availed using a DVB-H compliant handset. Today, there are no DVB-H compliant handsets in the Indian market. Initially the service was not launched commercially because of lack of spectrum in the UHF band (470-862 Mhz), and a lack of understanding on how to commercialize this model. Now the Information & Broadcasting Ministry in India has already made plans to release this spectrum for auction to use for Broadband Wireless Access (LTE) instead. So this kills the DVB-H story in India.

Mobile Television – Broadcast – MBMS

Another new technology that is now being talked about is Mobile Broadcasting Multimedia Service (MBMS) which is based on cellular technologies. LTE Operators in India like Reliance Industries are running trials for this technology, because it fits well into their plans of LTE deployment with a big focus on video. It is used to bring IPTV services to the mobile, and can work very well with LTE networks. This utilizes the cellular (mobile) network. This technology is used to create the equivalent of IPTV on a mobile network. Each channel is streamed to one multicast IP address and the mobiles in that cell join that multicast group to view the channel. It requires support of MBMS technology on the base stations as well as in the core network equipment. Since each Base station (radio) is responsible for a cell, this helps optimize the bandwidth only if multiple users within that cell are viewing the same program.

Interactive Television – combining satellite television (DVB-S) with mobile

Satellite television uses a one way satellite connection to the television through a dish antenna. This means that the communication with the viewer is one-way. Hence all the users in an area get the same set of programs. To make one way medium more interactive, and personalize television more, an uplink channel from the user to the headend is required. Set top boxes with a broadband port or a wireless dongle can be used to provide this communication from the user to the head end. This can enable many interesting applications like distance learning, true Video On Demand, etc.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/resources/mobile-tv

Internet Protocol Television

Tina Mani — 2013-03-15T08:37:39Z

In this unit, Tina Mani discusses about Internet Protocol Television (IP TV), what is it, its history, how it works, and the service providers in India.

IPTV

What is IP TV?
IP TV stands for Internet Protocol Television, i.e., television that is delivered to the house over an IP Network, rather than over traditional satellite, cable or terrestrial networks. This means that the television content is packetized into IP packets and delivered through a high speed access network (like Digital Subscriber Line ( DSL)).

The term IPTV should not be confused with the delivery of television over internet (for example watching YouTube videos or live channels like NDTV on your PC over your broadband connection). Traditionally internet is a best effort network and does not provide any guarantees to an individual service. However, the IP network used for delivery of IPTV is built specially to deliver this service and hence has performance and security features required to build a reliable service which customers will pay for.

Hence, IPTV is usually provided by fixed network providers who already deliver voice and internet services to the last mile (i.e., the customer premises), and have control over the network from the head end up to the customer premise. Traditional TV using satellite or cable only includes Live TV and maybe a fixed small collection of movies that can be viewed as pay per view. IPTV is typically richer with features like gaming, time shift television and Video on Demand (VoD), apart from live TV. More on these features are described in the FAQ.

History
The term IPTV first appeared in 1995 with the founding of Precept Software. Precept developed an internet video product named IP/TV. It was a Windows and Unix-based application that transmitted single and multi-source audio and video traffic, ranging from low to DVD quality. Precept was acquired by Cisco Systems in 1998. Cisco retains the IP/TV trademark.

Kingston Communications, a regional telecommunications operator in the UK, launched KIT (Kingston Interactive Television), an IPTV over DSL broadband interactive TV service in September 1999. Kingston was one of the first companies in the world to introduce IPTV and IP VoD over ADSL.[1]

How does it work?
The figure below gives a very high level view of an IPTV system.

Figure 1: IPTV High level Architecture[2]

At the head end, content like Live TV channels are picked up from various sources like the satellite, and decrypted. The content is then compressed into a digital format like MPEG-2 or MPEG-4. Multiple programs or channels or sources like this are then packed into a single transport stream (MPEG2-TS) and packetized into IP packets to be multicast over the IP network.

Video on Demand programs are stored in a VoD Server after encrypting them with content protection mechanisms. The VoD servers are either centralized or geographically distributed. The VoD content is accessed by the individual subscriber through a unicast stream, since it is on-demand, catering to one individual.

The IP packets reach the home through a broadband access like DSL, where a splitter is used to separate out the TV from regular broadband.

The TV channels are played out through the Set Top Box, which is programmed to listen to the multicast channels depending on which channel it is tuned to, or the unicast stream for video on demand. It provides the interactive interface to allow the user to navigate different live channels, Video on Demand, movies, games, etc.

In the case of multiple set top boxes and PCs to view the programs, a home gateway can be used. Protocols like DLNA are used for networking within the home.

IPTV viewing on the PC

Viewing IPTV content on a Personal Computer usually requires a client which allows protected content to be viewed, and to provide a TV like view with programming guides, etc. Verimatrix Viewright is an example of a PC client that decodes protected content for PC viewing. More about this will be discussed in Module 8.2 IPTV.

IPTV viewing on cable

This will be discussed in detail in Module 8.7 Cable TV.

IPTV in India

In India, IPTV services are provided by Bharti Airtel in Delhi and Bangalore, as well as by BSNL and MTNL (through Aksh Optifiber (branded as iControl) and Smart TV group (branded as MyWay)). MyWay has recently exited the IPTV market due to insufficient demand.[3] IPTV is expected to pick up again in a few years when there is better last mile connectivity with Fiber to the Home (FTTH) or Long Term Evolution (LTE).

[1].From Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPTV)
[2].HSC Technical Wiki (bit.ly/ND9zxt)
[3].Light Reading Article (http://bit.ly/uKDGdG)

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/resources/ip-tv

IPTV (FAQs)

Tina Mani — 2013-03-15T08:51:37Z

This chapter deals with frequently asked questions relating to difference between IPTV and mobile television, IPTV and Internet television, difference between broadcast and unicast methods of television, additional support required for handsets to support MBMS, etc.

Mobile Television

What is the difference between IPTV and Mobile Television?
Mobile Television is the availability of regular television channels to view on your mobile. The bandwidth available in a wireless network is variable, also, the mobile device sizes are not standardized, and hence the technology requires support to adapt to these varied conditions. On the contrary, IPTV usually uses a reliable and controlled medium like fixed line broadband, or cable as a medium of transmission. It also assumes that the service provider offers some guarantees on the bandwidth allocated for television.

What is the difference between IPTV and Internet television?
Internet television refers to television/video service provided over the internet. In the case of Internet television, the content is streamed over the Web just like any other multimedia service. The internet is characterized by lack of guarantees about the bandwidth, although the variability is less than in the case of mobile networks. Internet television uses unicast point to point streaming because it is a service accessed by individual users from anywhere in the network.

On the contrary, IPTV usually uses a reliable and controlled medium like fixed line broadband, or cable as a medium of transmission. IPTV uses IP multicast over a controlled network with a set of users specifically subscribed to the service. Mobile television and internet television (television viewing on the PC using an internet connection) are also sometimes referred to as Over the Top or unmanaged television.

Which is the difference between broadcast and unicast methods of television?
Broadcast method of television allows multiple users to receive the same transmission from the source, while unicast television is a point to point method where a stream is sent to each user separately.

Which is a better mode of television – broadcast or unicast?
Ideally a combination of the two modes allows maximum flexibility and efficiency. Unicast television makes sense where each user gets personalized services like Video on Demand, recording of programs and so on. Broadcast television is more efficient when many people in the same area are viewing a popular program at the same time. IPTV uses broadcast/multicast technology for the live television and common television channels, and the unicast method for the personalized services.

What are the various technologies defined for mobile broadcast television?
Some of the technologies defined for mobile broadcast television include MediaFlo (A Qualcomm standard), Digital Video Broadcasting (DVB-H), Multimedia Broadcast and Multicast Services (MBMS), Enhanced MBMS (e-MBMS) and Advanced Television Committee Standards (ATSC). Of these, e-MBMS is the latest technology expected to see mass adoption in the future, while DVB-H has been deployed in some places in Europe and MediaFlo in the US in the past. Of these technologies, MediaFlo is a proprietary technology; MBMS has been created by 3GPP, while the DVB-H and ATSC come as an evolution of traditional television standards.

What additional support is required for the handsets to support MBMS?
The handsets should be able to read three control channels defined for MBMS, which indicate the availability of MBMS, understand the frame structure of the transmission, and read the actual broadcast data. It should also support OMA BCAST, which is a standard defined for the Electronic Service Guide (ESG) and renders the television programming guide information.

Are there any MBMS compliant handsets in the market?
MBMS has been trialed by many operators starting from 2007; however, commercial deployments of MBMS have not been announced. It is expected that some of the LTE operators in Asia, especially densely populated countries like India and China will launch MBMS. There are no commercially available handsets that support MBMS in the open market. The handsets used are expected to be custom made and bundled with LTE subscriptions.

Are any additional network elements needed to support MBMS?
An element called BMS-C (Broadcast Multicast Service Center) is introduced; this manages subscription, billing and session information for MBMS. Other network elements like MCE (Multi-cell Coordination Entity) are also required for multi-cell broadcast, in LTE networks, where multiple cells are coordinated to retransmit the same information. More details will be discussed in the technical module 2.8.6.

Where are the standards for MBMS defined?
MBMS was introduced in Release 6 of 3GPP specs, but has been defined in more detail in Release 9, in conjunction with LTE.

Additional Reading: http://bit.ly/LUloxu

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/resources/ip-tv-faqs

Dr. Nadeem Akhtar

praskrishna — 2012-06-27T06:59:40Z

Dr. Nadeem Akhtar is currently working as Principal Research Engineer at the Centre of Excellence in Wireless Technology (CEWiT). He leads the network layer research team at CEWiT and also represents CEWiT at 3GPP Radio Access Networks Working Group meetings. His research interests lie in the field of mobile and broadband wireless access technologies. Dr. Akhtar is a member of IEEE Standards Association and ITU-APT Foundation of India.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/knowledge-repository-on-internet-access/nadeem-akhtar

Dr. Rakesh Mehrotra

praskrishna — 2012-08-05T14:41:14Z

Dr.Rakesh Mehrotra has more than 30 years of experience in Telecom Operations, DTH Broadcasting, GMPCS and Satellite, Software Application, Global IT Solutions, and Mobile Communication Networks. He was the Ex-President, Tata Teleservices Ltd, Ex-VP ASC Enterprises Ltd (Zee TV), Ex-GM & COO, Crompton Greaves.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/knowledge-repository-on-internet-access/rakesh-mehrotra

Paranjoy Guha Thakurta

praskrishna — 2012-06-27T06:52:50Z

Paranjoy Guha Thakurta is an independent journalist and an educator. His work experience, spanning nearly 35 years, cuts across different media: print, radio, television and documentary cinema. He is a writer, speaker, anchor, interviewer, teacher and a commentator. His main areas of interest are the working of India’s political economy and the media, on which he has authored/co-authored books and directed/produced documentary films. Some of the media organizations that he has worked with are Business India, BusinessWorld, The Telegraph, India Today, The Pioneer, and Television Eighteen.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/knowledge-repository-on-internet-access/paranjoy-guha-thakurta

Satya N Gupta

praskrishna — 2012-06-27T06:49:40Z

Satya N Gupta is a veteran in the field of telecommunications, drawing from his vast experience in telecom regulation as well as industry. Gupta joined the Planning and Coordination Wing of Ministry of Communication in 1981, holding the post of Officer-in-charge of Wireless Monitoring Station, Srinagar and Secretary, Regional Advisory Committee of SACFA for J&K and HP. Among other accomplishments, he was a member of the NGN Regulation review group of ITU and also worked as Pr. Advisor with Telecom Regulatory Authority of India at the level of Additional Secretary and is heading the Converged Network Division dealing with Regulatory, Technical and Economic aspects of Data Networks and Services.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/knowledge-repository-on-internet-access/satya-n-gupta

Dr. Surendra Pal

praskrishna — 2012-06-27T06:27:16Z

Dr.Surendra Pal is the associate director of the Indian Space Research Organization’s Satellite Centre and Programme Director of ISRO’s Satellite Navigation Program.

Pioneering the creation of India’s satellite navigation and communications systems, Dr. Pal was in charge of the design, development, and the fabrication of spacecraft-related telecommunication systems for all Indian scientific, remote-sensing and communication satellites. Further, he established essential satellite-based navigation schemes in India, such as developing the Indian Regional Navigational Satellite System (IRNSS) and GPS Aided and Geo Augmented Navigation (GAGAN).

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/knowledge-repository-on-internet-access/surendra-pal

Unlicensed Spectrum Policy Brief for Government of India

Satya N Gupta, Sunil Abraham and Yelena Gyulkhandanyan — 2012-09-11T16:23:45Z

Centre for Internet & Society and the Ford Foundation are delighted to bring you the Unlicensed Spectrum Policy brief for Government of India. The policy brief authored by Satya N Gupta, Sunil Abraham and Yelena Gyulkhandanyan contains an Executive Summary and eight chapters. The research aims to recommend unlicensed spectrum policy to the Government of India based on recent developments in wireless technology, community needs and international best practices.

Executive Summary

The aim of this policy brief is to recommend unlicensed spectrum policy to the Indian Government based on recent developments in wireless technology, community needs and international best practices. We seek to demonstrate the need for and importance of unlicensed spectrum as a medium for inexpensive connectivity in rural/remote areas and source of innovation by serving as a barrier-free and cost-effective platform for testing and implementing of new technologies.

The specific frequency bands that we request for unlicensing are: 433-434 MHz, 902-928 MHz, 1880-1900 MHz, 2483-2500 MHz, 5150-5350 MHz, and 5725-5775 MHz. These demands reflect the widespread market adoption in countries where these bands have already become unlicensed.

Interference concerns to licensed users, which are the predominant reason for the limited allocation of unlicensed spectrum, are greatly diminished. Interference-free spectrum use by multiple operators is enabled by the short-range, low-power nature of most of the technologies operating in these spectrum bands, as well as innovative techniques that facilitate spectrum sharing.

Technological advancements such as Wireless Local Area Network (WLAN), Ultra Wide Band (UWB), Radio Frequency Identification (RFID), Near -Field Communication (NFC) systems, and others have demonstrated that when an opportunity for cost-efficient and flexible spectrum usage is presented in the form of unlicensed spectrum, the market is likely to respond through innovation and expansion.

The value of unlicensed spectrum in bridging the digital divide has been demonstrated through community wireless networking projects as well as inexpensive ITES (IT enabled services) operating on unlicensed spectrum that have been created to spread connectivity to digitally-marginalized areas. As demonstrated by numerous case studies, such networks administer e-learning, e-commerce, telemedicine, e-agriculture, and many other initiatives that lead to equitable social and economic growth, making unlicensed spectrum a “public good”.

The International Telecommunication Union (ITU), European Union telecom regulatory bodies, as well as leading state telecom policy makers and regulators such as the FCC (U.S. Federal Communications Commission) and OFCOM (UK Office of Communications) have recognized that the optimal use of radio spectrum is dependent on flexible spectrum management policies and the multi-time sharing of this precious resource. Of late, the relevance of unlicensed spectrum is being recognized by policy makers in India as well. This is evident from the National Telecom Policy 2012, as well as recent remarks on the subject made by senior government officials.

Download the Unlicensed Spectrum Policy brief for Government of India below:

PDF Document [519 Kb]
Word File [124 Kb]

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/unlicensed-spectrum-policy-brief-for-govt-of-india

Module 8.3 (Mobile Television FAQs)

Tina Mani — 2013-03-15T09:35:03Z

Tina Mani gives answers to commonly asked questions on the differences between mobile television and video, video downloading and video streaming, suitable video compression standard for mobile television, content delivery network, specific regulations needed to increase the adoption of mobile television in India, etc.

What is the difference between a mobile television and video on demand?
Mobile TV is the availability of regular TV channels to view on your mobile. Video on Demand (VoD) services make a central collection of pre-recorded content like videos available to view any time the user wants to on the mobile , PC or television.
Do the handsets need any special features to view streaming video?
No, most of the handsets that support a high speed data connection also have video capabilities and a built in media player. These support the standard streaming protocols. However, for better user experience, an application client can be used on the handset to render the programming guide and to change channels easily.
What is the difference between video downloading and video streaming?
Video downloading downloads the file to the mobile and then it can be played from the local storage any number of times without a subsequent internet connection to the server. In the case of streaming, the file is located on a separate streaming server and played out to the mobile over an internet connection. Chunks of the media are stored in the buffer, can start to be viewed before the entire file is downloaded.
Where is the video content that is to be streamed stored?
The Video Content to be streamed to a mobile is usually stored in a separate storage associated with a Content Management System (CMS).
What are the protocols used for streaming video?
The protocols commonly used for streaming video are RTSP (Real Time Streaming protocol), Microsoft Silverlight and HTTP Adaptive Streaming (Iphone).
What determines the size of the digital content file?
The size of the digital content file is determined by the resolution, screen size or number of pixels (eg High Definition means 1920x1080), Standard Definition means 720x480), the frame rate (eg. 5 frames/sec) and the type of encoding (for eg., MP4 container with H264 is the most suitable for streaming).
What determines the frame rate of a video?
A video is a series of fast moving pictures. To capture more action, more frames are required to be taken per second. Sports or Action videos typically require higher frame rates than news channels. The frame rate is determined at the time of creation of the video.
What is the most suitable video compression standard (encoder) for mobile television?
H264/AVC, also known as MPEG-4 is the most suitable encoder for mobile TV, because it has the best quality for a given bitrate, and also can be used in a very wide range of applications and bit rates from very low bandwidth for a small screen like a mobile to HDTV on a big television screen. It is also an industry standard and most widely supported by the mobiles in the market.
What is the relationship between the speed of your data connection and the bit rate at which the stream is encoded?
Usually, the stream should be played out at a rate closest to the speed of the data connection, so that the video is smooth and uninterrupted. If the data connection is too slow, the video has to buffer for some time, and only when there is enough data, it plays on the handset.
Since the rights for the content to be played over mobiles are different from the standard rights, who in the ecosystem usually acquires these rights?
Several models are prevalent worldwide, but the most common one is where content aggregators who already work with media companies to acquire the rights for other content like music or pictures also acquire rights for the video content. They then get into revenue sharing arrangements with telecom operators to use their network to broadcast the content. Some fixed network operators who have broadcasting rights for IP Television (IPTV) or satellite TV (eg Airtel, Reliance) can work with the same media companies to extend the rights. There have been successful models outside India (eg Belgacom) where mobile operators have acquired content themselves and provided to the consumers over their network.
What are examples of some mobile television services in India?
Mobile TV services were launched by most of the Indian operators (eg. Airtel, VF, Idea Cellular, etc) with GPRS (2G) data connections, however, the user experience at the lower data speeds was not very good. There weren’t many technology players in the market at this time either. With the 3G launches, the experience is much better now. However, the success of any service like mobile TV depends on the content as well. So far this service has not seen huge adoption. Some of the content providers like NDTV have also launched services independent of the operator.
Are any specific regulations needed to increase the adoption of mobile television in India?
Mobile TV has two possible modes – broadcast and unicast. For the unicast mode, all it requires is a data connection that is provided through a regular 2G, 3G or 4G connection. Hence there is no special spectrum requirement for this mode. For the broadcast mode, depending on the technology (DVB-H or MBMS), special spectrum may be needed (for DVB-H). At this point, there is some contention about the use of the 698-862 MHz spectrum for DVB-H (Doordarshan), or for the use of this spectrum for BWA deployments in India . The latter approach would make sense because the general BWA spectrum can then be used for all services including mobile TV. Also the MBMS technology, which seems to be the most universally accepted broadcast technology for LTE does not require separate spectrum, but can run mobile TV in a broadcast mode using the same spectrum. Mobile TV licenses should be available to mobile operators as well.

Tina Mani works with Wavesncloud Consultants

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/resources/mobile-tv-faq

Report on the 3rd IJLT-CIS Lecture Series on Telecom Laws and Regulation

Rohan Samarajiva — 2012-06-05T09:30:11Z

Mr. Samarajiva, by his own admission, is a ‘jack of all trades’. His breadth of regulatory and teaching experience is only matched by his ability to turn a potentially complex topic like ‘Tariff Regulation’ into a beautifully weaved story punctuated with generous doses of wit and humour.

Lecture by Rohan Samarajiva[1]

Mr. Samarajiva’s lecture was divided into two sessions. In the first session, he introduced the ICT policy and regulation think tank, LIRNEasia, which was founded by him and also described the various capacity-building measures that it regularly undertakes. He went on to discuss various aspects of the policy-making process with the participants, including how they could engage with the same. He also introduced the CPRSouth conference – a capacity building initiative to develop young ICT scholars in the Asia-Pacific region. With the 2013 edition of conference scheduled to take place in Mysore, Karnataka, Mr. Samarajiva invited
all present to participate and contribute towards making it a success. Towards the end of the session, Mr. Samarajiva also fielded questions from students on different aspects of engagement with the policy making process in areas of telecom, infrastructure and egovernance projects.

A short break for tea followed, during which students got the opportunity to interact with Mr.Samarajiva in a more informal setting. The range of topics discussed during the break stretched from nuclear power and its pitfalls to diverse aspects of intellectual property and environmental law.

The second session of Mr. Samarajiva’s lecture dealt with ‘Tariff Regulation in India and Abroad’. The lecture began with Mr. Samarajiva showing students some astonishing facts regarding levels of awareness about internet penetration into the lives of those living in the Asia-Pacific. The statistics showed fundamental misconceptions regarding the internet and a need for greater awareness programs to ensure knowledge-parity across different strata of society.

The discussion about ‘Tariff Regulation’ itself began with an introduction to the theory of regulation itself. Delving into his rich experience, Mr. Samarajiva spoke about the differing approaches to regulation that exists across the Asia-Pacific region. Citing examples from Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Bhutan and India, he explained how a tariff regulator’s success is typically measured and remarked that the Indian regulator’s approach of forbearance has been linked to its low tariff rates - one of the cheapest mobile call and broadband rates in the world. In this regard, he stressed on the characteristics a regulator should seek to ensure the following attributes in a market: information symmetry, lack of barriers to entry/exit, the multiplicity of buyers and sellers, the presence of substitutable products and rational market players. Explaining how concentration of market power can lead to consumer exploitation, he proceeded to address the various regulatory tools used to ensure a more equitable distribution of market power. These include: rate of return regulation, price cap regulation and benchmark regulation.

Taking India’s situation specifically, Mr. Samarajiva showed students various statistics including data from the Nokia Total Cost of Ownership Study 2011, data concerning fixed and mobile broadband prices in South East Asia and South Asia as well the Tariff Regulation scores from the 2011 Telecom Policy and Regulatory Environment Survey. Furthermore, he introduced students to the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) – a mathematical tool that serves as an indicator of prevailing levels of competition in a particular market. Using these inputs, he showed how the extremely high levels of circle-level as well as overall competition in the Indian telecom segment coupled with a policy of regulatory forbearance had ensured India’s mobile call and broadband rates were the one of the lowest in the region as well as the world. This, he posited, was the primary reason for the policy of forbearance being such a success in India. This peculiar market structure is also the reason why a similar approach might not work in every country that is similar demographically and location-wise.

Drawing upon his personal experience as a consultant on the regulatory policy for the Maldives, which has a duopoly in the telecom market, Mr. Samarajiva outlined the relevant factors in formation of a regulatory policy in such a market. The regulator should be interested in incentivising efficiency, while also keeping tariffs at a level that allows operators to make sufficient returns. The critical factor in the computation of tariffs is the cost incurred by the telecom company in providing these services. The ease of regulation and procuring licenses and approvals often proves to be a decisive factor, and a potential entry barrier to the market. After highlighting these issues, Mr. Samarajiva explained how the optimal solution for the regulator was to take a slightly hands-off approach and provide for a band, within which service providers would fix the tariff. This form of asymmetric regulation would serve the dual purposes of regulating unfair competition as well as protecting consumer interests. The benchmark for banded forbearance would be fixed on a comparison of the tariffs and market conditions. Mr. Samarajiva discussed the different relevant factors for setting the benchmark, including selection of mobile services basket and comparison with neighbouring countries, or demographic peers. For any tariff to be fixed outside the bounds of the band, approval would have to be taken from the regulator, and in the resulting inquiry the regulator would rely upon the commonly used economic indicators and justifications to determine if the same should be permitted.

With the vote of thanks, the inaugural lecture of the 3rd IJLT-CIS Lecture Series 2012 on Telecom Law and Regulation in India drew to a close. The slide set used during the presentation may be accessed here.

[1].Rohan Samarajiva is founding Chair and CEO of LIRNEasia, an ICT policy and regulation think tank active across 12 emerging Asian economies. He has served in numerous roles including as the Director General of Telecommunications in Sri Lanka (1998-99), a founder director of the ICT Agency of Sri Lanka (2003-05), Honorary Professor at the University of Moratuwa in Sri Lanka (2003-04), Visiting Professor of Economics of Infrastructures at the Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands (2000-03) and Associate Professor of Communication and Public Policy at the Ohio State University in the US (1987-2000). Samarajiva was Policy Advisor to the Ministry of Post and Telecom in Bangladesh (2007-09).

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/ijlt-cis-lecture-series-on-telecom-laws

India’s telecom success story turns sour

praskrishna — 2012-06-04T05:14:28Z

Over the past decade, the number of cellphones in India shot up from 6.5 million to 900 million, a prime example of how an industry could exploit the vast consumer market here to achieve breathtaking rates of growth and, in the process, help transform the country.

The article by Simon Denyer was published in the Washington Post on June 1, 2012. Shyam Ponappa is quoted in the article.

But that success story is starting to turn sour as a combination of greed, corruption and incompetence threatens to arrest that growth. Instead of being an advertisement for India’s economic potential, the telecom story has become an example for foreign investors of the perils of doing business here.

It also serves as a parable for the nation as a whole, of how India’s dysfunctional systems of governance threaten to undermine the private-sector success story of the past decade.

"There is a danger of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory," said Mohammad Chowdhury, an executive director and telecommunication specialist at consultants PwC India.

The first signs of trouble emerged in late 2008, when the boom was still at its height. In what became known as the "2G scam," an Indian journalist uncovered corruption and favoritism in the way that spectrum bandwidth — the radio frequency bands that companies use to transmit data — was being allotted to individual companies.

Accused of defrauding the Indian exchequer of billions of dollars and of accepting bribes worth hundreds of millions in return for spectrum allocation, the communications minister, A. Raja, and two senior bureaucrats were arrested in February 2011. More than a dozen business leaders also were jailed or charged.

But the slow response to the scandal has threatened the sector’s continued growth.

Last year, the Supreme Court canceled all 122 licenses that Raja had granted in 2008, even in cases in which there was no suggestion of corruption. Companies that had invested huge sums of money in India, many of them not even implicated in the scandal, suddenly found their investments under threat.

Norway’s Telenor, which is party owned by the state, stood to lose about $3 billion, probably the biggest foreign investment loss by a Norwegian company, Trade Minister Trond Giske said last month. "If it is forced to move out of the country, it would have further political implications," he warned.

Up for auction

But the biggest blow to companies came when the Supreme Court, in an attempt to foster transparency and fairness, ordered that all spectrum be put up for auction to the highest bidder.

The auction system had failed in many countries, including the United States and Britain, with companies often overreaching to bid for spectrum and ending up bankrupt.

Instead, India had decided — wisely, in the view of many experts — to sell the spectrum cheaply in return for a share in eventual revenue. That gave companies the financial headroom to invest in towers across the country and helped make calls affordable for hundreds of millions of poor people.

"There are very strong economic reasons for not auctioning spectrum in developing countries," said Shyam Ponappa of the Centre for Internet and Society.

To add insult to injury, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India recently recommended that the spectrum from the canceled licenses be auctioned for a minimum price many times as high as in comparable auctions all over the world.

It also recommended that spectrum now held by other companies be re-auctioned when existing licenses come up for renewal between 2014 and 2025, estimating that that could earn the cash-strapped government $50 billion in extra revenue.

A cabinet committee will meet this month to consider the regulator’s recommendations. But the industry is up in arms.

The Cellular Operators Association of India called the regulator’s recommendations "arbitrary, regressive and inconsistent" and said they would prevent the industry from delivering "on the government’s vision of affordable communications, rural penetration and rollout of data services."

Telecom entrepreneur Sunil Mittal called the recommendations "catastrophic." Mittal is the chairman and chief executive of Bharti Enterprises, which owns Airtel, one of India’s largest cellphone-service providers.

PwC India estimates that the recommendations will push up average consumer tariffs by about a third, meaning price-sensitive consumers will use their phones less. The biggest losers will be the rural poor, he said.

Indeed, investment in new telecom towers has stalled, and any attempt to squeeze more money from the industry will probably delay what could have been the next chapter in India’s telecom revolution — the rollout of mobile broadband services across a country where 85 percent of the population lacks Internet access.

"It is a huge opportunity missed," said A.S. Panneerselvan of Panos South Asia.

Vodaphone tax case

As the ripples of the 2G scam widened, a separate tax dispute with British telecom giant Vodafone also has cast a shadow over India’s image as an investment destination.

In 2007, Vodafone bought a two-thirds stake in the Indian arm of Hong Kong’s Hutchison Whampoa for $11.2 billion, without paying tax. Vodafone says that the deal was conducted abroad and is not covered under Indian tax law — and that if anyone should be liable, it would be the Chinese seller rather than the buyer.

The Indian tax man disagreed. When India’s Supreme Court sided with Vodafone, the New Delhi government retroactively changed its tax laws and served Vodafone with a bill for $3.75 billion in tax, penalties and interest.

Governments around the world, including the Obama administration, complained that India’s tax laws were deterring foreign investment.

The telecom debacle stems from the government’s failure to set up an independent, autonomous and credible regulatory authority, such as the Federal Communications Commission, said former regulator Satya N. Gupta.

Instead, India’s Communications Ministry makes policies and implements them, its bureaucrats and ministers unwilling to surrender power — power that Raja is accused of abusing by changing the rules to favor his cronies.

Some experts say the industry has to take much of the blame, because companies constantly lobby for rules to be changed or decisions to be made in their favor.

Others accuse the Supreme Court of overstepping its mandate and entering the realm of policymaking. But Gupta says that was an inevitable product of the way the system was set up, that the court stepped in only because the institutions of government had failed.

"If the regulator was an independent and empowered body with executive responsibility, this would not have happened."

Rajeev Chandrasekhar, a former information-technology and telecom entrepreneur who is now a member of Parliament, said India’s governance has simply not kept pace with the economy’s transformation.

"The government as an institution is still in the 1800s, while the private sector is in the 2100s," he said. "There is nothing in India you can do without going to the government for some kind of clearance. There is always government in your life. These two worlds keep knocking at each other."

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/telecom-success-story-turns-sour

3rd IJLT-CIS Lecture Series at NLSIU, Bangalore

praskrishna — 2012-05-25T15:33:16Z

The Indian Journal of Law and Technology in association with the Centre for Internet and Society, Bangalore is organising the 3rd IJLT-CIS Lecture Series at the National Law School of India University, Bangalore. The lecture series will be spread out over the course of the year and will include eminent speakers who will talk with the students and other interested persons on their topics of expertise.

To kick off the lecture series, Professor Rohan Samarajiva will deliver the inaugural lecture on Tariff Regulation in South Asia.

Tariff regulation has in the recent past attracted the attention of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India and the Telecom Dispute Settlement Appellate Tribunal, as well as the Department of Telecom at the Union Ministry of Communications. India has a burgeoning and competitive cellular services provider market, and tariff regulation has far-reaching impact on the industry. Moreover, as aware consumers of mobile telephony and data services, this is an issue that is relevant for all of us.

Prof Samarajiva is a pre-eminent figure in policy-making and academia on the subject of information and communications technology, and this is an excellent opportunity to get his insights on the crucial topic, not just from an Indian perspective but from a pan-Asian viewpoint. He has taught at universities in USA, Netherlands and Sri Lanka and is currently Chairman & CEO, LIRNEasia, an ICT policy and regulation think tank active across 12 emerging Asian economies. He is also a Board member at Communication for Policy Research - South, which is a capacity building initiative to develop Asia-Pacific based policy initiatives on ICT policy regulation among junior to mid level scholars. His full profile can be accessed here.

The lecture will be organised at NLSIU, Bangalore on Sunday, the 27th of May, 2012 from 5.30 pm to 6.30 pm. You are requested to take your seats by 5.20 pm. The hour-long session will include both a lecture and an interactive session with the speaker. Interested persons are requested to register for the lecture series by sending in an email to editorialboard@ijlt.in

The address of the venue is

National Law School of India University
Jnanabharati Road, Nagarbhavi
Bangalore - 560072
Google maps location: http://g.co/maps/ppwcr

Follow our event page ‘3rd IJLT-CIS Lecture Series’ on Facebook to remain updated!

Download the event poster [PDF, 57 kb]

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/ijlt-cis-lecture-series-nlsiu

Google Policy Fellowship Programme: Call for Applications

praskrishna — 2012-05-24T15:38:28Z

The Centre for Internet & Society (CIS) is inviting applications for the Google Policy Fellowship programme. Google is providing a USD 7,500 stipend to the India Fellow, who will be selected by August 15, 2012.

The Google Policy Fellowship offers successful candidates an opportunity to develop research and debate on the fellowship focus areas, which include Access to Knowledge, Openness in India, Freedom of Expression, Privacy, and Telecom, for a period of about ten weeks starting from August 2012 upto October 2012. CIS will select the India Fellow. Send in your applications for the position by June 27, 2012.

To apply, please send to google.fellowship@cis-india.org the following materials:

Statement of Purpose: A brief write-up outlining about your interest and qualifications for the programme including the relevant academic, professional and extracurricular experiences. As part of the write-up, also explain on what you hope to gain from participation in the programme and what research work concerning free expression online you would like to further through this programme. (About 1200 words max).
Resume
Three references

Fellowship Focus Areas

Access to Knowledge: Studies looking at access to knowledge issues in India in light of copyright law, consumers law, parallel imports and the interplay between pervasive technologies and intellectual property rights, targeted at policymakers, Members of Parliament, publishers, photographers, filmmakers, etc.
Openness in India: Studies with policy recommendations on open access to scholarly literature, free access to law, open content, open standards, free and open source software, aimed at policymakers, policy researchers, academics and the general public.
Freedom of Expression: Studies on policy, regulatory and legislative issues concerning censorship and freedom of speech and expression online, aimed at bloggers, journalists, authors and the general public.
Privacy: Studies on privacy issues like data protection and the right to information, limits to privacy in light of the provisions of the constitution, media norms and privacy, banking and financial privacy, workplace privacy, privacy and wire-tapping, e-governance and privacy, medical privacy, consumer privacy, etc., aimed at policymakers and the public.
Telecom: Building awareness and capacity on telecommunication policy in India for researchers and academicians, policymakers and regulators, consumer and civil society organisations, education and library institutions and lay persons through the creation of a dedicated web based resource focusing on knowledge dissemination.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the Google Policy Fellowship program?
The Google Policy Fellowship program offers students interested in Internet and technology related policy issues with an opportunity to spend their summer working on these issues at the Centre for Internet and Society at Bangalore. Students will work for a period of ten weeks starting from July 2012. The research agenda for the program is based on legal and policy frameworks in the region connected to the ground-level perceptions of the fellowship focus areas mentioned above.

I am an International student can I apply and participate in the program? Are there any age restrictions on participating?
Yes. You must be 18 years of age or older by January 1, 2012 to be eligible to participate in Google Policy Fellowship program in 2012.

Are there citizenship requirements for the Fellowship?
For the time being, we are only accepting students eligible to work in India (e.g. Indian citizens, permanent residents of India, and individuals presently holding an Indian student visa. Google cannot provide guidance or assistance on obtaining the necessary documentation to meet the criteria.

Who is eligible to participate as a student in Google Policy Fellowship program?
In order to participate in the program, you must be a student. Google defines a student as an individual enrolled in or accepted into an accredited institution including (but not necessarily limited to) colleges, universities, masters programs, PhD programs and undergraduate programs. Eligibility is based on enrollment in an accredited university by January 1, 2012.

I am an International student can I apply and participate in the program?
In order to participate in the program, you must be a student (see Google's definition of a student above). You must also be eligible to work in India (see section on citizen requirements for fellowship above). Google cannot provide guidance or assistance on obtaining the necessary documentation to meet this criterion.
I have been accepted into an accredited post-secondary school program, but have not yet begun attending. Can I still take part in the program?
As long as you are enrolled in a college or university program as of January 1, 2012, you are eligible to participate in the program.
I graduate in the middle of the program. Can I still participate?
As long as you are enrolled in a college or university program as of January 1, 2012, you are eligible to participate in the program.

Payments, Forms, and Other Administrative Stuff

How do payments work?*

Google will provide a stipend of USD 7,500 equivalent to each Fellow for the summer.

Accepted students in good standing with their host organization will receive a USD 2,500 stipend payable shortly after they begin the Fellowship in August 2012.
Students who receive passing mid-term evaluations by their host organization will receive a USD 1,500 stipend shortly after the mid-term evaluation in September 2012.
Students who receive passing final evaluations by their host organization and who have submitted their final program evaluations will receive a USD 3,500 stipend shortly after final evaluations in October 2012.

Please note: Payments will be made by electronic bank transfer, and are contingent upon satisfactory evaluations by the host organization, completion of all required enrollment and other forms. Fellows are responsible for payment of any taxes associated with their receipt of the Fellowship stipend.

*While the three step payment structure given here corresponds to the one in the United States, disbursement of the amount may be altered as felt necessary.

What documentation is required from students?

Students should be prepared, upon request, to provide Google or the host organization with transcripts from their accredited institution as proof of enrollment or admission status. Transcripts do not need to be official (photo copy of original will be sufficient).

I would like to use the work I did for my Google Policy Fellowship to obtain course credit from my university. Is this acceptable?

Yes. If you need documentation from Google to provide to your school for course credit, you can contact Google. We will not provide documentation until we have received a final evaluation from your mentoring organization.

Host Organizations

What is Google's relationship with the Centre for Internet and Society?

Google provides the funding and administrative support for individual fellows directly. Google and the Centre for Internet and Society are not partners or affiliates. The Centre for Internet and Society does not represent the views or opinions of Google and cannot bind Google legally.

Important Dates

What is the program timeline?

June 27, 2012	Student Application Deadline. Applications must be received by midnight.
July 18, 2012	Student applicants are notified of the status of their applications.
August 2012	Students begin their fellowship with the host organization (start date to be determined by students and the host organization); Google issues initial student stipends.
September 2012	Mid-term evaluations; Google issues mid-term stipends.
October 2012	Final evaluations; Google issues final stipends.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/google-policy-fellowship

The Coming Telecom Monopoly

Shyam Ponappa — 2012-05-24T07:36:55Z

The 2G judgment and Trai spectrum pricing recommendations have led to a policy that makes sense for only one survivor.

Shyam Ponappa's column was published in the Business Standard on May 3, 2012

The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India, or Trai, has delivered a stunning blow to the telecom sector in the form of its spectrum pricing and refarming recommendations. The sector was already reeling from scandals and misgovernance, and staggered by a confused Supreme Court judgment based on inappropriate assumptions (for details, see “Time for a review”, March 1, 2012, and “Open access is the future,” March 4, 2012). This will cripple an erstwhile sunrise sector that drove (and still can) India’s prosperity through productivity, enabling many factors to converge positively — such as its economic momentum, enterprise, resilience and, most important, a demographic bulge that could become a blessing or a curse. This convergence was (and is) possible because of the enabling ability of telecom and broadband to provide access to education, vocational training and continuing education; health care and other public services; and commerce, including the delivery of individual output, within easy reach. All this is stalled, as we deliberately disembowel ourselves, as it were.

If Trai’s recommendations are implemented, they will ensure that a lone survivor dominates the sector, annihilating all significant competitors – Bharti, Vodafone, Idea, Tata, and newcomers like Telenor and Sistema – through their having to pay exorbitant fees just to keep their current business going, even without expansion. That is, provided the lawsuits that are likely to follow don’t obliterate everything for the next 10 years.

Are these setbacks happenstance, heaven-sent, or acts of man? Analysing the components shows that much is attributable to the machinations of men, although rendered by different individuals or groups under varying compulsions. The afflictions that began with cronyism and misgovernance have been aggravated by a judgment based on misapprehensions regarding: (a) spectrum technology; (b) the economics of auctions and; (c) competition in network economies.

In trying to get at the corrupt nexus of corporations, politicians, bureaucrats, and just plain crooked people, indiscriminate zealotry is destroying legitimate enterprise. The judgment lumps the guilty with the circumstantially proximate. Coupled with defining auctions as best for the public interest, this set the stage for what has followed. The furore over corruption and the Anna Hazare movement ensure that any objective recommendation would come under fire, with a mobocracy baying for revenge.

Is being deprived of ubiquitous, reasonably-priced broadband so devastating? Yes, because of broadband’s great potential in India’s vastness for enabling people at relatively low cost, compared with, say, fixing energy supply, or sanitation and water, or roads, or growing food. All these are necessary; but broadband is much easier to achieve, at lower cost, and would bring it all more easily within our grasp, especially in rural areas.

Performance

Some question the beneficial effect of revenue sharing from the National Telecom Policy, 1999, (NTP-99) suggesting the sector might have done as well or better without the change. Pakistan is cited as an example for growth with auctions. Consider the performance of the sector in both countries.

Chart 1 - Mobile Subscriptions (Millions) 2003-2010

(The third line shows India’s numbers reduced to 70 per cent, reflecting an estimate of live subscriptions.)

Chart 2 shows the percentage of population served. Pakistan’s coverage grew

Chart 2: Percent Population Covered

Sources: India – TRAI; PIB; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecommunications_Statistics_in_India
Pakistan - http://www.pta.gov.pk/index.php

rapidly until about 60 per cent, then tapered off. India started more gradually before accelerating to 60 per cent a couple of years later, and kept going. In March 2011, both were around 70 per cent. At the end of December 2011, India was at 76.86 per cent.

However, there are two major differences. One is the scale of India’s operations. Sheer magnitude makes for much greater complexity, and the achievement is therefore remarkable. The second is the significantly higher government levies in India. India’s telecom sector is perhaps the world’s most heavily burdened, with government collections higher than in Pakistan by 15 to 24 per cent of revenues.* (Compared with China,where government charges are only 3.5 per cent, India’s levies are even more grossly out of line.) Had Indian enterprises not had this burden, it’s conceivable they might have had the capacity and stomach to effectively address rural coverage, especially with the right incentives.

Achieving Ubiquitous Broadband

Now consider what needs doing for countrywide access to broadband, and what odds have to be overcome. First, there’s the addition necessary to rural and semi-urban networks, where almost three times the existing coverage is needed. Much of this needs wireless access. This is why spectrum pricing critically affects outcomes. Many people in India harp on a litany of sunk-costs-not-affecting-tariffs, oblivious to the vast deficiency in network coverage, ie, areas and people without access. It’s like arguing over pricing without any production plant or products. Without capital investments in network coverage, there can be no services, nor any tariffs, high or low. There is little doubt of the effects of high spectrum and licence fees: these needs remain unmet. Hence the low rural teledensity of under 39 per cent at the end of February 2012, with urban coverage at nearly 170 per cent, and overall teledensity at 78 per cent. Separately, there’s the issue of inadequate incentives for broadband delivery.

Statements from Trai and the Department of Telecommunications about the spectrum pricing recommendations being reasonable because of the revenue potential simply don’t add up. Their projections are based on a fantasy of booming growth (like the Budget projection of 7.6 per cent GDP growth, but even more exaggerated). Whereas the combined effect of the scam and its fallout, sentiment, momentum, and misguided efforts at tax-gouging will ensure that telecom revenue growth is no more than a stunted five to seven per cent, at best. No bank will lend seven-year funds in such uncertain circumstances to what was once a sunrise sector — but is now like heavy infrastructure, with a need for 20-year financing. Add the costs and difficulty of refarming the 900 MHz spectrum, and one has to wonder: who is going to bid, and why? It makes sense only for one survivor. All this is aside from the extension of subsidised non-performance at the PSUs, instead of transforming them into anchors of an open-access national network.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/coming-telecom-monopoly