India Sets Strict New Net Neutrality Rules
India Sets Strict New Net Neutrality Rules is a Voice of America article by Anjana Pasricha, published on 9 February 2016. The report covers TRAI’s ruling banning differential pricing for internet services in India, reactions from the Save the Internet campaign, and Sunil Abraham’s view that the ban, while well-intentioned, was more absolute than comparable regulations elsewhere in the world.
Contents
Article Details
- 📰 Published in:
- Voice of America
- 📅 Date:
- 9 February 2016
- 👤 Author:
- Anjana Pasricha
- 📄 Type:
- News Report
- 📰 Newspaper Link:
- Read Online
Full Text
NEW DELHI — In India, advocates of net neutrality have welcomed new rules by the telecom regulator that have blocked efforts by Facebook to offer free but limited access to the web in the country's fast growing Internet market.
In a widely awaited ruling, the Telecom Regulator Authority of India (TRAI) said on Monday that "no service provider shall charge differential pricing on the basis of application, platforms or websites or sources." It will impose penalties of $735 a day if the regulations are broken.
Kiran Jonnalagadda, who was among a group of 10 that launched an impassioned campaign called Save the Internet, says they have won a "fabulous" victory against large corporations to ensure equal web access for millions.
"We were up against the most powerful companies in the world, we had no chance of fighting Airtel last year, we had no chance of fighting Facebook. I think the only reason it worked is that we were on the side of facts, the opposition was not," says Jonnalagadda.
Debate on Airtel
The campaign on net neutrality snowballed into a nationwide public debate after an Indian telecom company, Airtel, launched a marketing platform last April on which it planned to offer customers access with no data charges to certain Internet services and sites.
In recent weeks, the focus turned to "Free Basics", a service being offered by Facebook on mobile phones to a handful of sites in areas such as communication, healthcare, and education.
Saying it wanted to vastly expand Internet access in poor, rural areas, Facebook had launched a massive advertising campaign in support of the platform. Only about 300 million in the country of 1.2 billion people have access to the net, many just through mobile devices.
But campaigners slammed Free Basics as "poor Internet for poor people" and said it would create a "walled garden" in which Facebook would control the content it offered users. Leading Indian technology entrepreneurs and university professors also called on the government to guard against attempts by Internet giants to turn the country into a "digital colony."
Many of them have applauded the regulator's move to strengthen net neutrality.
Ban on differential pricing
However, some are raising questions about the complete ban on differential pricing announced by the regulator. That includes the Bangalore-based Center for Internet and Society research group, which says India has put in place the most stringent net neutrality regulations across the world. Its executive director, Sunil Abraham, says TRAI cited the examples of the Netherlands and Chile, but the ban on differential pricing in those countries is not as absolute as the one notified in India.
"We think that if proper technological safeguards and other market safeguards are put in place, it would be possible to have both — to have rapid growth in Internet access and reduced harm that emerge[s] from network neutrality violations," says Abraham.
Indeed, the last word may not have been said on net neutrality in India as big telecom operators are expected to mount legal challenges to the regulator's ruling in the coming months.
Expressing disappointment with India's ruling, the Cellular Operators Association of India has called the ban on differential pricing a "welfare reducing measure" that could block an avenue for "less advantaged citizens to move to increased economic growth and prosperity by harnessing the power of the Internet."
In a statement, Facebook has said "we will continue our efforts to eliminate barriers and give the unconnected an easier path to the Internet."
But after having tasted victory, the volunteers at Save the Internet, who have grown from about 10 to 100 in the last year, have already set their sights on another aspect of net neutrality besides differential pricing.
"The campaign is not going to retire because this is not the end of it. There is also discrimination on the basis of speed, which the regulator has not taken up yet," says Jonnalagadda.
Context and Background
TRAI’s February 2016 ruling came after roughly a year of sustained public debate over differential pricing, zero-rating platforms, and the question of whether selective free access to parts of the internet counted as a public good or a commercial distortion. The ruling was one of the strongest of its kind globally at the time, going further than the frameworks in the Netherlands and Chile that TRAI had itself referenced.
Sunil Abraham’s comments reflect a position CIS had consistently held throughout that debate: that the goal of expanded internet access and the goal of network neutrality did not have to be treated as mutually exclusive, provided the right regulatory conditions were in place. His remarks were notable precisely because they came as most civil society voices were celebrating the ruling without qualification.
The article also captures the momentum behind Save the Internet, which had grown from a small group into a significant public campaign within a year. The broader regulatory question about speed-based discrimination, which Jonnalagadda flags at the end, would remain unresolved for some time after the differential pricing ban was formalised.
External Link
📄 This page was created on 31 May 2026. You can view its history on GitHub, preview the fileTip: Press Alt+Shift+G, or inspect the . Last updated on 31 May 2026.