# Airtel opposes net neutrality; asks Google, Facebook to share profits



## sling-shot (Jul 25, 2012)

> Net neutrality is one of the growing issues in a number of countries across the globe, especially in the emerging countries where Internet usage via mobile phone is going past the fixed-line web. Net neutrality basically means ISPs are supposed to treat all sorts of Internet access in the same fashion.
> 
> Indian telecom giant Bharti Airtel has come out against the net neutrality and asked the Internet companies such as Google, Yahoo! and Facebook to share their revenues for using operators’ expensive infrastructure.
> 
> ...



Airtel opposes net neutrality; asks Google, Facebook to share profits - Internet | ThinkDigit News


----------



## krishnandu.sarkar (Jul 25, 2012)

I didn't understand completely but what does Airtel mean to say..??

Peoples are already paying them for their connection so this statement "Today, Google, Yahoo! and others are enjoying at the cost of network operator. We are the ones investing in setting up data pipes and they make the money" doesn't makes any sense.

It's their business standard which helped them to make money not Airtel.

Airtel's job is to provide connection and charge us for the connection and it's over. Now it's upto us who are using the web services.

Well in this way, Employee's one day will ask Businessman's to give them share of the business income. Employee's duty is to create the product for which businessman's pays him.

Now it's businessman's talent that he sold it for high price or what.


----------



## reniarahim1 (Jul 25, 2012)

what the hell did i just read.....airtel want to make cash from where ever possible.


----------



## sling-shot (Jul 25, 2012)

So you have a successful shop. Many people take taxis and come to your shop. Can the taxi driver ask you to pay him money for each person he brings in? I mean ..... they should actually thank you for running a successful shop and giving them more business!

Generally that happens only in Govt run subsidized services. In any private enterprise, those who use their services more or cause others to do the same are rewarded.

Corporations / people behind them can stoop to such low levels to make another paisa more.


----------



## Skud (Jul 25, 2012)

Now Airtel should start sharing its profit with me because as a customer I am directly contributing to its kitty.


----------



## The Sorcerer (Jul 25, 2012)

Part of that article reminds me of this:
Airtel now vocally against network neutrality


----------



## Faun (Jul 25, 2012)

Skud said:


> Now Airtel should start sharing its profit with me because as a customer I am directly contributing to its kitty.



Nice point. Oh and Airtel is a duck.


----------



## bubusam13 (Jul 26, 2012)

If Airtel Block Google, Yahoo and Facebook, hardly anybody excluding business organisations will take their connection.


----------



## coderunknown (Jul 26, 2012)

while Airtel shouts, Google made a few hundred millions more in the meantime.


----------



## asingh (Jul 26, 2012)

Are they nuts in the head or what. They forgot to mention, "their" infrastructure which users utilize to access web sites, they charge people. Why not this caveat. Idiotic, stupid, and embarrassing.


----------



## paroh (Jul 26, 2012)

Skud said:


> Now Airtel should start sharing its profit with me because as a customer I am directly contributing to its kitty.



++++++++++++


----------



## Piyush (Jul 26, 2012)

Besharam Airtel


----------



## Kl@w-24 (Jul 26, 2012)

"You are using an Internet connection provided by AirTel. Access to this website is, therefore, not available."

Expecting to see this message on quite a few sites if these nutcases have their way.


----------



## fun2sh (Jul 26, 2012)

ROFL!!! Its like an Autorikshaaw wala will say to shopping malls that he transports customers to them so he want their profits too.


----------



## KDroid (Jul 26, 2012)

^^ Exactly.


----------



## mrintech (Jul 26, 2012)

*FailTel* opposes net neutrality; asks Google, Facebook to share profits


----------



## Anorion (Jul 26, 2012)

hmm donno about sharing profits, but sharing costs of the network makes total sense
google or fakebook would ideally be happy to invest in better infrastructure, and connectivity 
they may even do it who knows


----------



## Skyh3ck (Jul 27, 2012)

It seems they have done too much of MBA study. cant even they think before doing this


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jul 28, 2012)

fun2sh said:


> ROFL!!! Its like an Autorikshaaw wala will say to shopping malls that he transports customers to them so he want their profits too.



This


----------



## thetechfreak (Jul 28, 2012)

April 1 is quite far away. Bad Joke by Yaartel


----------



## kisame (Jul 28, 2012)

Who voted in favour of ISPs??

F**k Airtel for pulling a joke like this.They should improve their infrastructure and not b**ch.Already they are no. 2 telecom in India.Is there no end to their greed??


----------



## Desmond (Jul 28, 2012)

kisame said:


> *Who voted in favour of ISPs??*
> 
> F**k Airtel for pulling a joke like this.They should improve their infrastructure and not b**ch.Already they are no. 2 telecom in India.Is there no end to their greed??



Probably some employees of airtel among us.


----------



## KDroid (Jul 28, 2012)

kisame said:


> Who voted in favour of ISPs??
> 
> F**k Airtel for pulling a joke like this.They should improve their infrastructure and not b**ch.Already they are no. 2 telecom in India.Is there no end to their greed??



And No.5 in the World.


----------



## Anorion (Jul 28, 2012)

voted ISPs were right

there are too many one sided comments instead of even understanding what is going on, all this is not airtel's idea, this came up in an international conference of mobile ISPs almost two years ago, had to dig it up but here it is, its like fakebook and google are parasites on the cellular network 



> operators including France Telecom SA, Telecom Italia SpA and Vodafone Group Plc want a new deal that would require content providers like Apple and Google to pay fees linked to usage



Network investment: Apple, Google to pay - Times Of India

read article for reasons


----------



## kisame (Jul 28, 2012)

^You cant compare India to Europe.Internet penetration in India is around 10%.
And that news is 2 years old.I searched and came to conclusion that European operators were not able force Google,Apple to share revenues.
India's Internet population small, but powerful on social | ZDNet
Broadband Penetration in India [State-wise Report]
Granted these are old results but they say a lot.Airtel is not under same type of pressure as those in Europe.


----------



## KDroid (Jul 28, 2012)

It doesn't matter whose idea it is. It is lame.

In this way, the Mobile Manufacturers will also start demanding their share of profit from the telecom comapnies. Laptop/PC Manufactureres will start demanding share of profit from Microsoft. Would that be Right?

They are not providing us internet connection for nothing.


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jul 28, 2012)

Anorion said:


> voted ISPs were right
> 
> there are too many one sided comments instead of even understanding what is going on, all this is not airtel's idea, this came up in an international conference of mobile ISPs almost two years ago, had to dig it up but here it is, its like fakebook and google are parasites on the cellular network
> 
> ...



I want your side of the argument to the question I'm raising below:

How can the ISPs claim to be "affected" by excess traffic when they charge for bandwidth already ? They greedily charge for every last GB (and then throttle speeds to very low levels) and all this is covered by the amount the user pays.

If a user has a low 1GB data cap and he exceeds it after using too much of facebook and youtube, (taking BSNL's example) he pays a good amount for every MB consumed and the ISP (BSNL) profits handsomely. So how can they expect additional money from facebook and youtube ? That is just plain greediness.

I like to use fun2sh's argument here. Autorickshaw or Taxi operators already charge high fares to ferry people to airports and/or malls. So claiming that high demand to get to airports and/or malls is affecting their infrastructure is ridiculous.  If the KMs to travel is high the user pays that much as well. 

From what I can see, the only way ISPs would be affected is if they are actually overselling bandwidth and popularity of certain sites is reducing their chance to oversell. And IMHO overselling without informing the users is unethical to begin with.


----------



## rider (Jul 28, 2012)

Airtel is the worst in broadband.. still providing only 256kbps on unlimited connection.

Grow up!! Airtel.. Aukad mai raho


----------



## Anorion (Jul 28, 2012)

"How can the ISPs claim to be "affected" by excess traffic when they charge for bandwidth already ?"
ok will try to explain this part. there is bandwidth allocated for specific use. Now, the amount of usage can exceed the amount of planned bandwidth... this is like trucks being overloaded messing up the roads, or tables in restaurants occupied by one guy, or flights being overbooked, or concert and theater tickets that have black markets. All of this happens in the digital environment. There is so much you have planned for, and so much use that occurs. 

now these things use bandwidth continuously. it's more or less like the device is constantly sending things back and forth to the internet. at some point it stops making economic sense for air to carry this kinds of signals. this is a kind of pollution. we are not at a flash point yet, doing some quick calculation europe has 8 zeroes in it's population, we have 9. 10% of us is the same order of magnitude as them. their penetration is above 100% so _that_ put's _them_ in the same ballpark as _us_. 

your phone line can charge you your cable bill. not done yet. that's sent over the air. that is the problem. there is not enough airspace for all these things. It's ISPs saying early on that they will not be able to viably support this kind of usage.


----------



## pranav0091 (Jul 28, 2012)

^
That's why I am paying them. To provide me bandwidth. I dont get your point, unless net connectivity is free, which its not.


----------



## eggman (Jul 28, 2012)

^^I couldn't understand half the things you said


----------



## Anorion (Jul 28, 2012)

^140% penetration in india, gonna happen some time 
every single mobile is constantly sending social networking updates, recieving email and messenger, watching youtube, downloading ebooks and listening to internet radio
what is the kind of infrastructure needed for this? who should pay for it?


----------



## bubusam13 (Jul 29, 2012)

we pay for 3G plans right. A shopkeeper must be happy when he gets more customer. May be he will now need some helper whom he have to pay salary but then also he is in profit.

Like that mobile companies may have to setup good infrastructure, but they are getting customers right. 

E,g: I before never used internet on my cell but now I pay monthly for 3G since I got my android. So they are getting paid and android ads one more 3G customer to them.


----------



## Desmond (Jul 29, 2012)

We pay them enough, but the infrastructure still sucks here. Let them first provide good infrastructure and abolish FUPs, then demand compensation for maintenance/bandwidth.


----------



## gameranand (Jul 30, 2012)

What was Airtel thinking while giving these type of statement. They don't know their boundaries.


----------



## Anorion (Jul 30, 2012)

DeSmOnD dAvId said:


> We pay them enough, but the infrastructure still sucks here. Let them first provide good infrastructure and abolish FUPs, then demand compensation for maintenance/bandwidth.


yes. how about we invite those who stand to benefit most from the infrastructure to invest in it, this is a win-win proposition, don't know where the conflict is coming from. 

you guys have heard of google fiber right? Maybe they will do something similar with mobile


----------



## gameranand (Jul 30, 2012)

I don't think that it was a invitation at all by the words and sentences that were used.


----------



## freshseasons (Jul 30, 2012)

Hmm how about this scenario. Airtel insists and puts it foot down that Google, Facebook, Gmail bear the infrastructure cost.

  Google, Facebook block their services on Airtel ISP in retaliation. 

  Seriously how may of us will want Airtel bandwidth then without google, Facebook or Gmail.

  Doesn't look quite winning situation for Airtel then. Beg , Invite then can. Insist ,Force forget !


----------



## sling-shot (Jul 30, 2012)

Anorion said:


> how about we invite those who stand to benefit most from the infrastructure to invest in it, this is a win-win proposition,



*Investing* and *paying* are two entirely different things. Here AirTel is not asking for investment. I believe if it was an investment, Google or Facebook might be more than happy to do it. In an investment, one expects returns as in dividend.


----------



## akkib89 (Jul 31, 2012)

I earlier thought that just Reliace was ****ed up, seems Airtel doesn't want to fall behind Reliance in ****ing things up.


----------



## asingh (Aug 1, 2012)

*//MOD*
Closing thread for some discussions. Will re-open.

Opening.


----------



## Desmond (Aug 1, 2012)

Anorion said:


> yes. how about we invite those who stand to benefit most from the infrastructure to invest in it, this is a win-win proposition, don't know where the conflict is coming from.
> 
> you guys have heard of google fiber right? Maybe they will do something similar with mobile



But how many ISPs will they have to "please"? If they appease Airtel, all other ISPs will follow suit.

But if it can help abolish FUP, then I think we can work something out.


----------



## Anorion (Aug 1, 2012)

let's say 5 people start watching a 20 minute youtube video. they do this with a gap of three minutes. after 15 minutes there are 5 people watching a 20 minute youtube video. now the network can stream in in real time, or at whatever bitrate, or just _send the whole darn thing in the first 20 seconds_. this means every three minutes and 20 seconds, the users gets the file, and the network is done communicating with them. in the first scenario, at the end of fiteen minutes, the network is tied to five devices, and sending them the video in teh diff bandwidth of each device. the benefit of the last scenario is the amount of devices the network is tied to, and the amount of time it is doing this for. this option is not considered because of speed limits, without these, if just the content is billed, then the network can respond when and where there is demand, instead of responding slowly over time to all the demand, at all those specified rates. Podcasts are at times preferred to streaming for this reason.

In any case why not option 3? When have we ever not voted with our wallets? This might make net cheaper for us


----------



## Sarath (Aug 1, 2012)

I do not see any merit in how airtel can demand money from google, FB etc

In fact the irony is that it's they who should be charging for providing a search engine and a social interaction online and such...

I am already buying a packet of data worth 1800 for 75gb per month. This is a fixed amount, no matter how I spend it. I do not see how using 40% of my bandwidth suddenly causes infrastructure problems for airtel. If anything they are under prepared for future. 

A more legitimate demand would be asking Google, FB, twit to set up servers in India (which I presume they partly have) which will save airtel and other ISP s from using the previous and expensive undersea data lines and thus save loads of money. As consumers we benefit from micro milliseconds shaved between each pages.


----------



## NoasArcAngel (Aug 1, 2012)

It is absolutely ridiculous for Airtel to even voice such a claim. 

If airtel wants operating profits from facebook and google, might as well start asking every website its users visit for money to visit them. 

Either Airtel is going bankrupt or Mr. Bharti got a kick in the aee sss ss because of his "videshi" telecom ventures. and he is milking his losses out from facebook and google.

and there is no reason why airtel is complaining. they are already probably making huge gains by limiting data. 

Another thing people dont understand is that the ISP's pay for the speed and not for the data you download. Once this gets more publicized hopefully people will be able to make right decisions.

someone please visit this : Hayai | India's Fastest Broadband

i think the plans are pretty good. although as far as i know its only in bombay though .


----------

