Fact of the matter is that the so called “associations” have done precious little to lobby for the access. The biggest promise was that of unbundling the local loop; i.e. open up BSNL’s rotting rat infested telephone exchanges for others so that broadband can be rejigged. It wasn’t so. It was rejected on the grounds that it amounted to privatization of the behemoth. We are none to wiser about it. After years of facing pathetic access, we are now forced to put up with pathetic Fair Usage Policies.

Mind you. My own RTI application from TRAI has clearly shown that these so called Fair Usage Policies are “extra-constitutional” and “illegal” meaning thereby that they don’t have the official sanction. It also means that TRAI has not done anything in this regard. At present, I have been busy wrapping up my work so it leaves me little time to pursue this. Of late, I am still waiting for the appeal filed against TRAI with CIC; bump….I have no word from them.

But then how united are we to face these idiots and force to act the way consumers want them? I find the different plans bumpkin. For once, the “lowest paid plan” is the one that no one wants; specially when it comes with dastardly and bastardly speeds. The Indian mindset plays spoilsport here and I cannot really blame the so called “market forces”. Nevertheless, it is a matter of debate as to what sells and I cannot really point out a clear cut answer in the absence of solid data.

This brings forth the question of laying down fresh lines to service the market when already huge amounts of public monies have been spent over the past 50 years. Broadband is a long term planning with a huge amount of gestation built in. How many dumbfucks appreciate 1 Mbps? No one really notices the “speed” unless one wants minimal latency to connect their fancy PC’s or X Boxes. The population is minuscule.

Secondly, the recumbent operators are just not keen to service their areas. Has anyone heard of BSNL or even MTNL getting pro active to service their customers? They have the most fug ugly women to service their front desks who would make you feel as if you are interacting with your grannies. The point here is that an average run of the mill customer would hardly want to interact with a staff that is not inspired to service your needs.

So it all boils down to opening up the “exchanges” and allowing the people with gumption to lay down fat pipes and optic fiber cables to bring forth the goodies. It is not going to happen soon but then this is definitely a “suggestion”.

Having the useless information from the Public Information Officer, I explored ways and means to get the FULL information from TRAI.

It appears that there is a huge lobby to keep the definition of broadband as 256 kbps which can be “offered” at an attractive “price”. Anything over and above that is chargeable at a higher price. The companies incur a fixed price to extend the wire from the exchange to your premises. However, after that, we have no clue as to how a company, for example, Airtel justifies it’s monthly costs to service me as a customer. In the recent price fall, on what basis, the price was reduced? On what basis, the earlier price point was maintained?

The PIO has not specifically mentioned about the fair usage policy. Under no circumstances, does this fair usage policy apply, nor it is mandated, nor it is ‘legal’. I have no clue about whether TRAI is aware of such a thing but in any case, it needs a follow up and TRAI should be forced to stop the unfortunate usage.

In the long term, the license of these firms needs to be made public; how these private companies acquire them, how they charge and what are their revenue sources. Their accounts need to be audited and everything should be in the public domain.

I am only interested in a bare bones 2 Mbps connection and any other value added service maybe charged for. That is a legitimate right to make a profit. However, charging exorbitant rates for something as simple as a plain vanilla broadband access is unfair and the customer needs to be put in the loop.

I am reproducing the mail to the appellate authority in full. The best part is that I don’t have to pay the requisite fees and I am sure that the PIO would be put under the mat. TRAI should exert itself as an authority and not a hand maid of the various lobbies. Lets fight them!

November 23rd 2009

To,

Smt. Sadhana Dikshit,
Pr. Advisor (FA &IFA) & Appellate Authorit,
TRAI, Mahanagar Doorsanchar Bhawan,
Jawaharlal Nehru Marg,
Old Minto Road,
New Delhi-110 002.

Sub: Misleading, incoherent and incomplete reply received from PIO, Mr. P.K. Dutta vide letter No. 1(229)/2009-RTI dated 18th November 2009.

Respected Madam,

With reference to the above mentioned subject, the reply received from PIO Mr. P.K. Dutta is INCOMPLETE, INCOHERENT,ABSOLUTELY MISLEADING and NOT TO MY SATISFACTION AT ALL.

1) The definition of Broadband mentioned as per the letter is and I quote verbatim, “minimum speed of Broadband has been kept at 256 kpbs (sic) as per definition adopted by International Telecommunications Union(ITU).

After accessing the website of ITU, the picture is entirely different.
It says and I quote verbatim,” Recommendation I.113 of the ITU Standardization Sector defines broadband as a “transmission capacity that is faster than primary rate Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN) at 1.5 or 2.0 Megabits per second (Mbits)”.
(Accessed from http://www.itu.int/osg/spu/publications/birthofbroadband/faq.html and accessed on 22nd November 2009).

Hence this information is INCORRECT AND MISLEADING a customer.

2)The question number “4, 5 and 6” in the letter to PIO dated 6th November have NOT been answered. I had specifically asked:

Does fair usage policy violate any of the provisions of TRAI?
If it does, what action can be taken against errant Internet Service Provider?
Has any Internet Service Provider been ever penalised for violating for introducing “fair usage policy?

NO ANSWERS WERE GIVEN SPECIFICALLY TO THESE IMPORTANT QUESTIONS and it amounts to WITHOLDING THE INFORMATION.
Further, If the usage of the term “FAIR USAGE POLICY” is ‘illegal’. What action has TRAI taken to notify the various Internet Service Providers to avoid the usage of term and it’s implementation for ‘reducing the speeds’ to 50%’ of the availed plan. The following definition of Fair Usage Policy is taken from Airtel available as a pdf download from their website (www.airtel.in/applications/xm/Fair_Usage_Policy.pdf)

“Under the policy we have defined fair usage levels for unlimited data transfer plans and
needless to mention, the usage levels set are very generous such that most customers will not
be affected by the Fair Usage Policy. On reaching the fair usage level, the plan speed would be rationalized by up to 50% for the restof the monthly billing cycle.”
IS TRAI AWARE OF SUCH A POLICY? WHAT ACTION HAS TRAI TAKEN TO AVOID THE USAGE OF THIS TERM?

3)Question number 8 in letter dated 6th November 2009 was specific and has NOT been answered to MY SATISFACTION, namely,
Has TRAI suggested reducing the price for various plan combinations?If yes, what is the base price fixed for an unlimited Internet Connection by any Internet Service Provider? If no, is there any provision whereby TRAI can act on behalf of the customer to reduce the prices?

I need to know whether TRAI speaks on behalf of the customers, whether TRAI asks the service providers about the break up of the various tariff plans as to under what head the various tariff plans are designed and on what basis the end customer is charged for availing the services of the various Internet Service Providers.

4)Question number 9 has NOT been answered at all namely, “ How has the tariff on unlimited broadband (1Mbps unlimited) being offered by Bharti Airtel fixed line been calculated?”

Please rush the information to me by speed/registered post at the following address listed below. In case the requisite information is not provided to me by the mandatory period, I have the option to escalate the matter to the second appellate authority namely CIC, New Delhi.

I am happy with Airtel providing me with an excellent DSL at my premises. However, in my opinion, I am paying a “heavy price” for 1 Mbps unlimited connectivity.

I am filing a RTI application with TRAI to know as to how the price has been ‘fixed” and whether it has the mandate from the regulator. It would take some time for “action” but in the meantime, I would continue to write about the “experience”.

I don’t endorse any of Tatas’ products personally but I guess, I need to be fair in my coverage. It’s very difficult to get a uniform view about the products because of various experiences with the companies and their products; given the fact that most of the customer surveys are funded by the companies themselves.

Over the Shyam’s blog for the low down on Tata Wimax.

Cheers!!

As usual, frequent call drops and inaccessibility has made my life miserable inside the campus. At first, they were “happy” to claim that an in building solution would be provided to address the issue. This was put down on some pretext or the other. I had no option except to grit my teeth and accept the status quo. It was then that Airtel installed it’s “boosters” and I sent a formal request to Vodafone to tie up with Airtel to share their infrastructure.

I understand that this is done on a revenue sharing basis; the company doesn’t want to incur on this cost for very obvious reasons.

It is from this time that the tug of war started. The first problem was the emphatic denial of the company that their network had no issues; which they claimed in writing. Unfortunately, a few hired dingbats from their company called in to narrate different versions of sob stories. One claimed that they needed permission from the Government to set up a cell site. Other bugger insisted that he’d be contend to “sweet talk” my pants off; for which I wasn’t forthcoming for very obvious reasons.

Finally, on a hot Sunday afternoon, I got a call from the Vodafone’s Nodal Office. It was supposed to be an official call but the idiot had it from me; specially when I quoted specific provisions of TRAI act which made it mandatory to ensure that there was no disruption of services.

Anyway, I mailed in to the Secretary of TRAI who, as per the information on the website, is supposed to ensure that the various regulations as passed by TRAI are enforced. On expected lines, the bloody leechy babu didnot even acknowledge my email. I mailed them on other occasions and specifically told that I’d be seeking the information through other means; to no avail.

I have now sought information under Right to Information Act, 2005 which is an amazing piece of legislation and perhaps truly empowers the citizens of India.

How are these two incidents related to each other? I want to exert pressure on Vodafone Essar to act; to get TRAI in the loop because these bunch of morons are good for nothing and to force them to act on my behalf.

It does take time for information to filter out but emboldened by this, I plan to seek information about the Broadband pricing; the various heads under which it is charged and why the official definition has not been revised in as many years.

Watch this space.

It’s high time we act in unison. I remember the time when we had forced BSNL (and it’s lethargic army of frigging idiots) to implement unlimited Broadband. At that point of time, I was totally convinced that a concerted public action can achieve wonders. At this point of time, it’s me who is alone in fight against the big bad corporate telecom company and I intend to take the battle in their court till the time I am assured of a decent network coverage; something that I pay for.

Oh by the way, it reminds me that so far, Vodafone Essar would qualify easily for the “COVETED” asshole of the year award!!

Airtel had a headstart as far as the Broadband was concerned. They could afford to deploy best of technologies and get superior cables. They were not plagued by the usual red tapism and clearly were not answerable to the public for their investments. I am not sure but I have a feeling that they donot have those fancy Chinese crap as their backend. They made a huge splash when they announced their underground submarine cable from Chennai to Singapore to carry the streams of data. Where is the “leader” now?

There is only word to describe them: Assholes for their pig headed policies.

I remember the time when my Internet had conked off. It took an entire cabling change without rectifying the problem. Ultimately, the problem was traced to their exchange; I am sure that they would have to revoke the “fair usage policy” because I raised a hue and cry about not getting the promised speeds. It is conjectural to assume the exact cause of the troubles; nevertheless it was a relief to have someone come from the company to sort out the issues at odd hours.

It’s time that Airtel pulls up it’s socks and decides about taking the lead without being vindictive. Their mobile division sucks to the core (as it’s infested with the likes of BSNL’s babus) but even if they work in a fancy corporate office, it doesn’t cost me to heap up abuses against them.

Frankly, most of them are re-sellers of the bandwidth. Although, there have been huge capacity layouts in the past couple of years, the last mile has been problematic. There have been attempts made to address this yawning gap by introducing novel technologies like WiMax, this hasn’t caught on given the limited modes of access and the problem with the allocation of frequencies.

For all practical purposes, whatever “infrastructure” has been laid, seems to be “overburdened” with the hordes of users latching on to Torrents or You Tube sites. It hasn’t reached a critical mass with users putting up their antics online, there has been an exponential increase in the users for social networks. This means, pictures and songs and other media being exchanged.

You Tube has made serious attempts to monetise it’s massive bandwidth requirements and signed on deals to put up movies online; all in the hope to popularise the uptake of this interesting medium online. This means a further strain on the already streched resources and a potential nightmare for the telecom companies who don’t want to invest in more resources. It practically means that they would need to put in more money for almost the same bunch of users because Internet uptake is pathetic in this country.

In this backdrop, I don’t emphatise with the ISP’s because their marketing efforts are pathetic. Although, they have a rag tag association (ISPAI) to address their needs and often claim to speak for the consumers, I find no mention about them in the mainstream press. Broadband is essential for shrinking boundaries and I have focussed on the advantages of having the same in my earlier write ups. It means all the more because we need to be able to “kick start” the initiative for free and open access.

The only way I see it coming is from the policy initiatives. This would surely need massive funds for expansion; I would surely praise the efforts of telecom companies being able to promote thin client computing initiatives based on Linux to cut costs and get more people in the loop.

Tough situations call for tough measures. We need imaginative solutions; to think out of the box to promote computing, tax breaks and subsidised broadband access in excess of 2 Mbps. Although, this is utopia but is achievable with scaling of infrastructure.

This brings us back to the issue at hand here today. There was a huge public outcry against Time Warner which was accused of “monopolising” the access to Internet. It claimed that people would “misuse” it for sites like YouTube; but if you can’t provide the necessary infrastructure, get out of business. Simple. One can’t just turn off or turn on the cap; people pay money to access regardless of the restrictions.

This has far reaching implications on issues like Net Neutrality. Unfortunately, Indian media is solely focussed on issues which it considers as “sellable” or expects a “reader/viewer” interest. Unless, there is a decent platform to debate or talk about such issues, we cannot really expect a dramatic improvement in the state of affairs.

I challange anyone of the ISP’s or their representatives from the industry for an open debate and I gurantee facts and figures to downplay them. They have the Government of India to blame but their rag tag association has hardly helped the matters to make a sincere and honest efforts to ameliorate the matters.

Hence, they have bandied together to implement their “fair usage policy”.

Surprisingly and happily, it has found a mention in the mainstream media. Mint has taken up the cudgels on behalf of the existing customers and I truly laud their efforts.

There is no other way except to show a middle finger to the likes of Tatas (are they not always on the wrong end of the stick?), Airtel boffins (why are you screwing up a fantastic service) and Sify (the original buggers who have bastardised the broadband access in India). There are other smaller players who source their bandwidth (in effect work as re-sellers) and would be glad to limit the access accordingly.

Surprisingly, Internet and Mobile Association of India ( a bealagured body that is a rag tag association of the service providers) has spoken out against it’s members. It’s president (or whoever the self proclaimed titular head) has gone on record to say,

“If the service is provided under ‘broadband’ to the customers when they signed in, it cannot be reduced to 128 (kbps) since the government of India definition of broadband is minimum 256 (kbps). This is a violation of government policy as well as short-changing customers if they had signed in for a broadband service.”

Violation of government policy? Really? Which one dude?

For all practical purposes, I request the readers to sign up the petition to protest against the restrictive access. It can be found here.

We are already having a pathetic state of affairs. The frigging morons expect the users to broadband to check email alone. Thats the state of majority of the users.

Who has given them the right to limit our access? Beats me.

sbm@bharti.com (Sunil Mittal, Chairman),
ceo.direct@bharti.com,
manoj.kohli@bharti.com (CEO, Bharti Airtel),
atul.bindal@bharti.com (CEO, Bharti Telemedia, the subsidiary that offers broadband services)

You could paste the email written here:

http://afup.broadbandforum.in/

I hope that this works and wakes them up from their slumber.

If this is true, there is some moron working overtime to kill the fantastic service. If I took an unlimited connection, it doesnt mean that it has to come with caps. Unlimited, for the uninitiated ASSHOLES means that it comes WITHOUT any CAPS on the downloads.

There is a petition against them regarding this “drastic announcement”. So far, the indications are that this doesn’t apply to the NCR region. Yet, it would be a BIG disaster if the policy gets into picture.

What the F*** is TRAI doing? Why are they sitting on their asses and not doing anything about it?

Correction. TRAI has NOT done anything about ANYTHING. I doubt whether the boffins would be “constrained” to act proactively.