Net neutrality: Facebook won’t withdraw controversial Internet.org from India

Social media giant Facebook said on Thursday that it will not withdraw its controversial zero-rated platform Internet.org from India despite scathing criticism from a top government committee, but will rather open it up further to newer telecom operators in order to provide internet access to the unconnected.
Kevin Martin, vice president for Facebook’s Mobile and Global Access Policy, emphasized that Internet.org “does not violate the principles of net neutrality,” especially as it offers an opportunity to all developers if they provide lighter versions that use limited bandwidth. “We have no program to withdraw Internet.org from India where we provide the platform with Reliance Communications,” Martin, who has earlier served as the chairman of the high-profile Federal Communications Commission (FCC) of the US, said.

“This programme is not exclusive and is open to all operators. We are trying to work with others, and are anxious to work with them,” he told TOI on the sidelines of the ‘India Economic Convention’, organized by the India Foundation and International Chamber of Commerce.

A top committee of the Department of Telecom (DoT), which submitted recommendations on the various aspects of net neutrality in May, had come out strongly against Facebook’s Internet.org initiative, saying, it favoured the social media giant and provided access only to select applications. The committee said content and application providers “cannot be permitted to act as gatekeepers and use network operations to extract value, even if it is for an ostensible public purpose.”

Martin denied that the company is acting as a gatekeeper and said Internet.org facilitates internet access to the unconnected across the world. “Most estimates say that there are nearly 4 billion people across the world, who are not connected.”

Elaborating further about Facebook’s stand on net neutrality, Martin said companies who owned the telecom infrastructure (operators) should not be able to limit where people want to go on the internet. “So when a user purchases internet access, they should be able to go where they want to.”

He said there should be no paid prioritization over the internet as it would enable companies with deep pockets to provide faster access by paying a fee to telecom operators. “We are are concerned about paid prioritization for fast lanes. We are opposed to this. There should be no throttling.”