When Microsoft
bundled its Browser software with the Windows OS it was held illegal. Why
should it be different for Indian ISPs?....
Domain Names
are established as identification marks on the Cyber Space akin to Trademarks.
Why should e-mail ID s be different?...
Consumers are
to be protected from Spam? Why Should it be used an excuse for putting chains
on the consumers?.
Digital Signatures are meant for
developing a responsible communication system on the Internet. Why should ISPs
be allowed to sabotage the system for their vested interests?.
These are the issues that confront Indian
ISP customers who want to switch ISPs. Certain e-mail policies followed by
ISPs are indirectly aimed at preventing consumers of ISP services from
switching their service providers. We call upon Thiru Dayanidhi Maran,
Honourable Minister of Communications and Information Technology to
immediately address these issues.
Naavi
(Details below)
Why Spam
Proliferates?
Spam is
recognized to be one of the biggest menace in the Cyber Space next only to
perhaps Virus and Pornography. Since Virus and Pornography also raid on Spam
for distribution, it is perhaps appropriate to consider the Spam menace to
include Virus and Pornography and therefore as the most important menace in
the society. It is widely agreed that around 85 to 90 % of all e-mails
circulating in the Cyber Space today is spam category. Hence it is natural
that "Netizens" who are the consumers of services are concerned with Spam and
expect regulators to address this issue.
However, in
India there has been a low regulatory interest in Spam prevention and despite
efforts from Netizen organizations like Naavi.org, the proposals for
amendments to ITA-2000 fail to address this issue.
In this
context, it is necessary to understand that one of the reasons for which Spam
proliferates is because the powerful community of ISPs who control the
Internet market have a vested interest in Spam. If today 90 % of e-mails are
spam, then e-mail consumers are paying nearly 90 % of the access charges to
receive spam. In other words, to receive Rs 10 worth of e-mails they are
spending Rs 100. There is thus a huge financial benefit for ISPs in sustaining
the current high spam regime.
Nevertheless
some ISPs try to do some tweaking of their systems ostensibly to prevent
spamming and the current discussion is on one such policy being adopted by
Indian ISPs. Though it is put under the garb of "Spam Prevention", the policy
is only to proliferate the business monopoly of the ISPs and put barriers for
ISP consumers from choosing a service provider at their own free will.
The Policy
that is Unfair
The policy in
question is "Preventing the ISP access customer from accessing SMTP servers of
other ISPs". This is ostensibly to prevent "Open relay" but actually prevents
a bonafide e-mail customer of one of the Indian Licensed ISPs from using
access service of another ISP. In other words, ISPs are bundling their "access
service" with "e-mail service" and if the customer is forced to go with the
restrictive trade practice if he wants to avail the service of an ISP.
Naavi.org had
already raised this issue (See articles,
Can an
ISP lock away your e-mails?,
Please
Do not Play around with Digital Identities,
Do We Need a Consumer Forum for ISP issues?) in the past. Though
some temporary solution was provided by understanding executives at Dishnet
DSL at that time, the problem got buried with the merger of the two ISPs. The
problem has now resurfaced with the aggressive marketing strategies of Airtel
to market its broadband services and unwary customers are getting trapped in
the process of switching ISPs with a need to change their long standing IDs in
the Cyber Space.
To be fair to
Airtel, it must be stated that the broad band services offered by them compare
extremely well with the Tata Broadband Services and I would not be surprised
if many of the current customers of Tata Broadband would shift to Airtel.
At one stroke, Airtel has halved the price of Broadband services
compared to Tatas and unless their services deteriorate with increasing
volume, they are likely to get deep into the ISP market. If Tata Broadband
does not wake up, their market share would plummet.
Though
the issue raised here is addressed to Airtel, the benefits of the current
unfair system actually strengthens the market hold of existing ISPs like Tata
Indicom and creates an artificial barrier for customers to switch over to new
ISPs. If a solution is found for the problem now posed, it is perhaps likely
to be of advantage to Airtel. However, our proposal is not because it is
beneficial or not to one ISP or the other but because it is fair to the
consumers.
Bundling of
Services
In order to
understand the problem being raised, it is necessary to appreciate that
Internet services consist of a bundle of different services. Each service may
require different skills and if the overall efficiency of the system is to be
enhanced then efficiency in the management of each individual component has to
be maximized.
In this context
let us now look at Internet Access service and E-Mail service as two
components of business. Presently, when one buys an access service whether a
broadband service or dial up service, the service provider gives him an e-mail
box with an identity attached to the domain of the service provider. For
example, when a person say naavi buys an access service from VSNL, he got an
ID naavi@vsnl.com. When he got an access
service from dishnet the ID in the domain of eth.net was allotted. Now if
Naavi opts for Airtel services, he would get
naavi@touchtelindia.net as his
new ID. As long as the IDs are given as free add ons to facilitate
communication between the customer and the service provider, it is fine. But
when a service provider says that I will now provide a new ID but I will put
barriers for you to use your earlier IDs, then the question of unfair business
practice comes in.
If a person
discontinues his earlier service, then perhaps there is no issue. However, if
a person would like to avail both services say because his office is
subscribing to one ISP while he uses another ISP at home or because one is a
dial up service and the other is a broadband or just for the sake of
redundancy, then the prevention of use of IDs of other ISPs starts hurting.
According to
the ISP policies today, if you are using Airtel services, you will not be able
to send outgoing mails from your Outlook express with the ID of vsnl.com.
Though VSNL runs its own authenticated SMTP server and does not allow any body
other than its authorized customers to access the smtp server, Airtel
prevents access to the server by its customer under the mistaken impression
that this is a measure to prevent Spam. Airtel must realize that if authorized
clients of VSNL are using smtp server of VSNL, it does not become a Spam and
therefore Airtel's attempt to prevent access to VSNL smtp server cannot be
accepted as a measure to prevent spam.
On the other
hand this restriction can only be interpreted as an attempt to discourage the
customers of Airtel from continuing to use their current IDs attached to a
competitor's domain. Therefore this becomes a bundling of service similar to
what Microsoft attempted to do and was legally prevented from doing.
If the e-mail
service and access service is unbundled, then independent e-mail service
providers can develop their services with features that the Netizens would
welcome. Already Google has emerged as a leader in webmail services and if
Indian ISPs do not see the writing on the wall, people will shift to Google
Mail and none of the ISPs will be able to maintain loyalty of their e-mail
customers.
Why There is
a Need to Allow Customers to use e-mail IDs of a Different ISP ?
Apart from the
business sense that the restriction will kill the e-mail services of all the
Indian ISPs with the public moving to Google type of services, it is necessary
to recognize certain other incongruencies in the policy of "I will not allow
my competitor's e-mail ID to be used by my customers".
We are all
aware that the domain names such as
www.naavi.org has already been recognized as Virtual properties providing
a right similar to Trademark right to a registrant. If this logic is beyond
legal dispute, then why should we not accept that an e-mail ID such as
naavi@vsnl.com by virtue of its first and
consistent use provide a right to the registrant to the mark "naavi@vsnl.com".?
After all if domain name is an identity to a web site in Cyber Space, the
e-mail ID is an identity to a person in the "Cyber Space". Though this is
perhaps yet to be confirmed in a Court of law, there is every reason to
believe that Courts will accept the argument that if an e-mail ID is being
consistently used by a certain person, he will have a right over it similar to
the domain name. Not accepting this argument would lead to the same kind of
disputes which we envisage in domain name disputes.
It must also be
remembered that "Digital Signatures" are slated to be the order of the day in
Cyber Space and when they become affordable ideally every e-mail should have
the digital signature of the sender. Today many customers have already
acquired digital signature certificates attached to an e-mail ID and using it
in their communication. Under the restricted policy adopted by Airtel and
others, it would not be possible to send digitally signed e-mails. For example
if my customers were a\earlier getting digitally signed e-mails from
naavi@vsnl.com, and if they now receive an
undigitally signed e-mail in the name of
naavi@touchtelindia.com, then
there is a serious issue of "Trust" in Cyber Space. If the ISP says that you
can very well take a new Digital Certificate, then it would amount to another
unfair bundling of service.
In fact, use of
digital signatures themselves are a solution to Spam and the system should
actually encourage the use of digital signatures rather than discouraging
them.
Solution
In the light of
the above, I request ISPs to follow the following suggestions or any
alternative that leads to the sorting out of the problem.
a) ISPs should
allow access to SMTP servers of all licensed ISPs in India (It is like Cross
certification ). It should be the responsibility of each ISP to ensure that
their SMTP servers are accessed only by authorised persons. If Google and
Hotmail can provide such access free of charge and Yahoo under their premium
service, there should be no technical barrier to providing such service.
b) It is open
to the ISPs to restrict the above permission to clients on specific request.
Though this could be considered as a premium service and charged additionally,
I donot advocate such additional burden on the customer since he is anyway
bearing the cost of the e-mail service with the other ISP in addition to the
access service of one ISP.
Benefits:
The unbundling
of e-mail service and access service will introduce free competition for the
two services separately and the consumers will get a better deal in the long
run.
More
importantly, it will encourage public to use one e-mail ID consistently so
that better trust can be built in the e-mail communication system.
Further the use
of Digital Signatures would not be restricted for extraneous reasons.
I request
the honourable Minister of Communications and Information Technology, Mr
Dayanidhi Maran to take up the issue and ensure a quick solution.
(A copy of
this note is being sent to the Minister. Comments from the public are welcome
and they will also be forwarded to the Ministry..Naavi)
Naavi
December 01, 2005
