The debate over whether internet call and messaging apps like WhatsApp, Telegram, and Google Meet should be brought under the ambit of telecom licences has been a hot topic in the telecommunications industry. Industry body Broadband India Forum (BIF) has strongly contested the suggestion put forth by telecom operators, arguing that such a move would be in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equal treatment to every person and entity.
BIF President TV Ramachandran emphasized that comparing OTT services to traditional telecom services like voice calls and SMS is fundamentally flawed. He pointed out that telecom service providers enjoy exclusive rights such as interference-free spectrum, numbering resources, and right of way to set up infrastructure, which OTT players do not possess. Therefore, bringing OTT services under the Telecom Act would be unjust and overlook the significant differences between the two categories.
The Cellular Operators Association of India (COAI) estimates that telecom operators have incurred an additional cost of Rs 10,000 crore in 2022-23 to support the traffic generated by popular entertainment and communication apps. Telecom operators argue that foreign apps that generate large data traffic should bear the infrastructure cost burden based on the traffic they generate.
In response to a consultation paper issued by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (Trai), telecom operators including Reliance Jio, Bharti Airtel, and Vodafone Idea have unanimously demanded that calling and messaging apps like WhatsApp, Signal, and Telegram should be brought under the licensing regime under the new Telecommunication Act. They argue that OTT communication services should be considered as access services under the new Act.
Reliance Jio highlighted that the definition of ‚message‘ and ‚telecommunication service‘ under the newly enacted Telecommunication Act, 2023, includes all forms of telecommunication services provided over the top using the public internet. They emphasized the need to bring OTT communication service providers under Access Services authorization to ensure consistency in regulations.
Bharti Airtel also supported the inclusion of OTT communication services under the Telecom Act, citing the Act’s broad definition of ‚telecommunications‘. They pointed out that while traditional telecom services are subject to monitoring by law enforcement agencies, OTT communication services remain unmonitored, posing challenges for law enforcement and crime prevention efforts.
The ongoing debate between telecom operators and industry bodies like BIF highlights the complexities surrounding the regulation of internet call and messaging apps. As technology continues to evolve, it is crucial for policymakers to strike a balance between promoting innovation and ensuring a level playing field for all players in the telecommunications sector.
