

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
In a move that open internet advocates say will "resonate around the world," India's top telecom regulator on Monday struck a decisive blow against Facebook's "discriminatory" and controlling internet scheme known as Free Basics.
The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India ruled against two-tiered pricing for different data platforms or content, effectively banning Free Basics, which only allows users free access to a small number of curated websites, including Facebook.
"The message is clear," declared Renata Avila, Web We Want programme manager at the World Wide Web Foundation, which was founded by Sir Tim Berners-Lee, the inventor of the web. "We can't create a two-tier Internet--one for the haves, and one for the have-nots. We must connect everyone to the full potential of the open Web."
"As the country with the second largest number of Internet users worldwide, this decision will resonate around the world," Avila added.
The Prohibition of Discriminatory Tariffs for Data Services Regulations, 2016 will "disallow service providers to offer or charge discriminatory tariffs for data services on the basis of content being accessed by a consumer," Sudhir Gupta, TRAI secretary, said in a statement.
"While formulating the regulations, the authority has largely been guided by the principles of net neutrality seeking to ensure that consumers get unhindered and non-discriminatory access to the internet," Gupta said.
Free Basics--which has launched in 18 mostly developing countries-- has faced mounting criticisms from net neutrality advocates, who said the program essentially allowed Facebook to serve as the internet "gatekeeper" for hundreds and thousands of the world's poorest people.
Open internet advocates celebrated the ruling Monday, which came after the TRAI issued a temporary ban on the service in late December in order to investigate whether it is in violation of net neutrality protections.
Mishi Choudhary, executive director of India's Software Freedom Law Center, said the group is "delighted by the regulator's recognition of the irreversible damage that stands to be done to the open Internet by allowing differential pricing."
"Today's decision is a major victory for free speech and for Internet users everywhere, no matter what Mark Zuckerberg's well-paid public relations team might tell you," said Evan Greer, campaign director for the U.S.-based Fight for the Future. According to the digital rights group, telecom companies such as T-Mobile and Verizon have been pushing similar practices in the U.S., claiming that they do not violate net neutrality.
"The basic principles of net neutrality are what have made the Web into what it is today," Greer continued. "Zero rating schemes and discriminatory pricing are just another tool to favor some applications over others. They allow ISPs to pick winners and losers, and create the same harms as fast lanes and slow lanes. They give Internet Service Providers too much power to shape Internet users' online experience, and open the floodgates for potential censorship and abuse."
Companies that violate the order will be fined 50,000 rupees per day (around $740/day) up to a maximum of 5 million rupees, according to the ruling, which will be reviewed in two years. As TechCrunch notes, "Those numbers are negligible for Facebook, which has invested millions in this program, but it's a crucial public opinion victory against the company that is at stake here."
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
In a move that open internet advocates say will "resonate around the world," India's top telecom regulator on Monday struck a decisive blow against Facebook's "discriminatory" and controlling internet scheme known as Free Basics.
The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India ruled against two-tiered pricing for different data platforms or content, effectively banning Free Basics, which only allows users free access to a small number of curated websites, including Facebook.
"The message is clear," declared Renata Avila, Web We Want programme manager at the World Wide Web Foundation, which was founded by Sir Tim Berners-Lee, the inventor of the web. "We can't create a two-tier Internet--one for the haves, and one for the have-nots. We must connect everyone to the full potential of the open Web."
"As the country with the second largest number of Internet users worldwide, this decision will resonate around the world," Avila added.
The Prohibition of Discriminatory Tariffs for Data Services Regulations, 2016 will "disallow service providers to offer or charge discriminatory tariffs for data services on the basis of content being accessed by a consumer," Sudhir Gupta, TRAI secretary, said in a statement.
"While formulating the regulations, the authority has largely been guided by the principles of net neutrality seeking to ensure that consumers get unhindered and non-discriminatory access to the internet," Gupta said.
Free Basics--which has launched in 18 mostly developing countries-- has faced mounting criticisms from net neutrality advocates, who said the program essentially allowed Facebook to serve as the internet "gatekeeper" for hundreds and thousands of the world's poorest people.
Open internet advocates celebrated the ruling Monday, which came after the TRAI issued a temporary ban on the service in late December in order to investigate whether it is in violation of net neutrality protections.
Mishi Choudhary, executive director of India's Software Freedom Law Center, said the group is "delighted by the regulator's recognition of the irreversible damage that stands to be done to the open Internet by allowing differential pricing."
"Today's decision is a major victory for free speech and for Internet users everywhere, no matter what Mark Zuckerberg's well-paid public relations team might tell you," said Evan Greer, campaign director for the U.S.-based Fight for the Future. According to the digital rights group, telecom companies such as T-Mobile and Verizon have been pushing similar practices in the U.S., claiming that they do not violate net neutrality.
"The basic principles of net neutrality are what have made the Web into what it is today," Greer continued. "Zero rating schemes and discriminatory pricing are just another tool to favor some applications over others. They allow ISPs to pick winners and losers, and create the same harms as fast lanes and slow lanes. They give Internet Service Providers too much power to shape Internet users' online experience, and open the floodgates for potential censorship and abuse."
Companies that violate the order will be fined 50,000 rupees per day (around $740/day) up to a maximum of 5 million rupees, according to the ruling, which will be reviewed in two years. As TechCrunch notes, "Those numbers are negligible for Facebook, which has invested millions in this program, but it's a crucial public opinion victory against the company that is at stake here."
In a move that open internet advocates say will "resonate around the world," India's top telecom regulator on Monday struck a decisive blow against Facebook's "discriminatory" and controlling internet scheme known as Free Basics.
The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India ruled against two-tiered pricing for different data platforms or content, effectively banning Free Basics, which only allows users free access to a small number of curated websites, including Facebook.
"The message is clear," declared Renata Avila, Web We Want programme manager at the World Wide Web Foundation, which was founded by Sir Tim Berners-Lee, the inventor of the web. "We can't create a two-tier Internet--one for the haves, and one for the have-nots. We must connect everyone to the full potential of the open Web."
"As the country with the second largest number of Internet users worldwide, this decision will resonate around the world," Avila added.
The Prohibition of Discriminatory Tariffs for Data Services Regulations, 2016 will "disallow service providers to offer or charge discriminatory tariffs for data services on the basis of content being accessed by a consumer," Sudhir Gupta, TRAI secretary, said in a statement.
"While formulating the regulations, the authority has largely been guided by the principles of net neutrality seeking to ensure that consumers get unhindered and non-discriminatory access to the internet," Gupta said.
Free Basics--which has launched in 18 mostly developing countries-- has faced mounting criticisms from net neutrality advocates, who said the program essentially allowed Facebook to serve as the internet "gatekeeper" for hundreds and thousands of the world's poorest people.
Open internet advocates celebrated the ruling Monday, which came after the TRAI issued a temporary ban on the service in late December in order to investigate whether it is in violation of net neutrality protections.
Mishi Choudhary, executive director of India's Software Freedom Law Center, said the group is "delighted by the regulator's recognition of the irreversible damage that stands to be done to the open Internet by allowing differential pricing."
"Today's decision is a major victory for free speech and for Internet users everywhere, no matter what Mark Zuckerberg's well-paid public relations team might tell you," said Evan Greer, campaign director for the U.S.-based Fight for the Future. According to the digital rights group, telecom companies such as T-Mobile and Verizon have been pushing similar practices in the U.S., claiming that they do not violate net neutrality.
"The basic principles of net neutrality are what have made the Web into what it is today," Greer continued. "Zero rating schemes and discriminatory pricing are just another tool to favor some applications over others. They allow ISPs to pick winners and losers, and create the same harms as fast lanes and slow lanes. They give Internet Service Providers too much power to shape Internet users' online experience, and open the floodgates for potential censorship and abuse."
Companies that violate the order will be fined 50,000 rupees per day (around $740/day) up to a maximum of 5 million rupees, according to the ruling, which will be reviewed in two years. As TechCrunch notes, "Those numbers are negligible for Facebook, which has invested millions in this program, but it's a crucial public opinion victory against the company that is at stake here."