Imagine a library where the librarian can decide which books you can and can’t read. They can also charge you extra to read certain books or slow your access to them. This is what the internet would be like without Net Neutrality. Net neutrality is the principle that all internet traffic should be treated equally. This means your internet service provider (ISP) can’t block or slow down access to certain websites or services, or charge you extra for using them. Whether you’re streaming videos, browsing websites, or sending cute cat GIFs to your friends, your data should flow freely and without any discrimination. If net neutrality weren’t a thing it would create a digital divide, where some content and websites load lightning-fast, while others are stuck in the slow lane. However, net neutrality is becoming a growing concern because internet service providers (ISPs) want to charge different prices for different types of internet traffic or to block or slow down access to certain websites or services. ISPs argue that this would allow them to invest more in their networks and provide better service to their customers. However, this would give ISPs too much power over the internet and would stifle innovation and competition.

Imagine that a new streaming service comes out that offers competitive prices and a wide selection of movies and TV shows. This streaming service could pose a threat to established streaming services like Netflix and Amazon Prime. To prevent this, an ISP could decide to block or slow down access to the new streaming service, or to charge its customers extra to use it. This would make it difficult for the new streaming service to compete and would reduce consumer choice. It may also prioritize or throttle internet speeds for certain services or websites unless they pay additional fees. This creates an uneven playing field, where larger corporations can afford faster and more reliable access, disadvantaging smaller businesses and startups. Another example is zero rating, which is when ISPs allow customers to access certain websites or services without using their data allowance. ISPs often use zero-rating to promote their services, or to partner with popular websites and services. However, zero-rating can also be used to discriminate against competing websites and services. For example, an ISP could offer zero-rating for its video streaming service, but not for competing video streaming services. This would give the ISP’s video streaming service an unfair advantage.

Without net neutrality, ISPs can easily analyze and manipulate data traffic, potentially discriminating against certain types of content or services based on their interests or partnerships. This could hinder access to specific content or platforms. It would also pose a risk that ISPs could manipulate access to information, potentially favouring certain political or ideological views, thereby undermining the democratic and open nature of the internet. Besides, ISPs can potentially gather and monetize consumer data in a way that compromises user privacy, as they have more control over what data is being transmitted and to whom.

India’s net neutrality rules were introduced in 2016 and were some of the most stringent in the world. The rules prohibited internet service providers (ISPs) from blocking or throttling access to any website or service, and from charging users extra for accessing certain websites or services. However, the rules were also challenged by ISPs and therefore, in 2018, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) issued a new set of net neutrality regulations that were more lenient than the previous regulations and allowed ISPs to offer zero-rating plans that exempt certain websites and services from data usage caps. Thus, the current net neutrality regulations in India are a compromise between the interests of ISPs and net neutrality advocates.