<div>At a time when various freedoms are under siege around the globe, one precious area still remains largely untouched – access to the Inter-net and what the cyberworld has to offer. So, it is no surprise when multitudes of netizens protest when-ever the establishment, be that the state or corporates, tries to extend its reach and subjugate the Internet in the pursuit of its vested interests. After battles on this front in some countries, it is now the turn of India to stand up and resist a perceived attempt to create a band of privileged websites. This is a serious threat to the prevalence of Net Neutrality which means Internet service providers should not discriminate among websites. In short, both the start-up and the most-established are given equal access to the Net. <br /><br />The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) set the cat among the pigeons when it came up with a consultation paper to get the views of netizens on whether Internet Service Providers could tie up with commercial web-based entities that would privilege them over other websites. The proposed tie-up between the service provider Airtel and the web-based retailer Flipkart aggravated the already-simmering anger among Internet users. That Flipkart has walked out of the deal indicates there was merit in the uproar as the tie-up would have meant that Airtel subscribers could have accessed Flipkart for free and not paid the normal data charges. The arrangement would have led to more web-based companies tying up with Internet service providers. This would have resulted in a set of privileged web-based companies who would have had higher bandwidth to facilitate faster downloads. The reason for this is that more the visitors, higher the revenue for the service providers from these websites. Those which remained out of these deals would have had at best normal bandwidth, more difficult to access and consequently fewer visitors. In time, they would have lost out to the privileged websites. It is this scenario that the proponents of net neutrality fear and want to nip in the bud, and rightly so. <br /><br />The potential of Internet is mind-boggling. It affords an opportunity for even a small-time and unknown entrepreneur to come up with an idea that works. In fact, this is how many of the top web-based giants today were when they started, including Flipkart. There are countless rags to riches stories on the Net and it would be extremely unfair if the newly-privileged misuse their clout to dominate the cyberworld. Inno-vative but struggling web entrepreneurs deserve their full and fair share of the Net space. <br /></div>
<div>At a time when various freedoms are under siege around the globe, one precious area still remains largely untouched – access to the Inter-net and what the cyberworld has to offer. So, it is no surprise when multitudes of netizens protest when-ever the establishment, be that the state or corporates, tries to extend its reach and subjugate the Internet in the pursuit of its vested interests. After battles on this front in some countries, it is now the turn of India to stand up and resist a perceived attempt to create a band of privileged websites. This is a serious threat to the prevalence of Net Neutrality which means Internet service providers should not discriminate among websites. In short, both the start-up and the most-established are given equal access to the Net. <br /><br />The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) set the cat among the pigeons when it came up with a consultation paper to get the views of netizens on whether Internet Service Providers could tie up with commercial web-based entities that would privilege them over other websites. The proposed tie-up between the service provider Airtel and the web-based retailer Flipkart aggravated the already-simmering anger among Internet users. That Flipkart has walked out of the deal indicates there was merit in the uproar as the tie-up would have meant that Airtel subscribers could have accessed Flipkart for free and not paid the normal data charges. The arrangement would have led to more web-based companies tying up with Internet service providers. This would have resulted in a set of privileged web-based companies who would have had higher bandwidth to facilitate faster downloads. The reason for this is that more the visitors, higher the revenue for the service providers from these websites. Those which remained out of these deals would have had at best normal bandwidth, more difficult to access and consequently fewer visitors. In time, they would have lost out to the privileged websites. It is this scenario that the proponents of net neutrality fear and want to nip in the bud, and rightly so. <br /><br />The potential of Internet is mind-boggling. It affords an opportunity for even a small-time and unknown entrepreneur to come up with an idea that works. In fact, this is how many of the top web-based giants today were when they started, including Flipkart. There are countless rags to riches stories on the Net and it would be extremely unfair if the newly-privileged misuse their clout to dominate the cyberworld. Inno-vative but struggling web entrepreneurs deserve their full and fair share of the Net space. <br /></div>