Home » , , , ,

Airtel To Moderate User Broadband Speeds; What Of Net Neutrality?

Share on Facebook0Tweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedIn0Email this to someone

Update 2: We’ve just received a response from Airtel:

“Fair Usage policy is an internationally accepted norm among the global broadband operators. We have observed that few of our customers have been using an excessive amount of bandwidth, thus impairing the browsing experience of an overwhelming majority of broadband users. To ensure that all our customers enjoy the best quality broadband experience, we have introduced the Fair Usage Policy. This policy is aimed at encouraging responsible usage among the very few, who make inappropriate use of this service.”

Frankly, what Airtel and Tata Indicom are doing is – impairing the broadband experience for a few, in order to ensure a better broadband experience for others. Or as George Orwell might have put it – Some broadband users are less equal than others.

Update: Some have mentioned that this isn’t a net neutrality issue. Our opinion is based on points (a)(1) and (a)(4)(A) and (b)(2) of the US’ Internet Freedom Preservation Act. Do leave a comment on whether you think this is against the principles of net neutrality or not.


Original Story: For all the goodwill Airtel has generated with reliable broadband connectivity and prompt customer service, they’ve now instituted a “Fair Usage” policy that is anti-consumer and, in our opinion, goes against the principle of net neutrality


As of last quarter, Airtel had around 992,775 broadband subscribers – around 18.2% of India’s limited broadband subscriber base, and offers services in 95 cities. Interestingly, Airtel’s wireline ARPU was reported to have increased 11% year on year in Q3, though it was down quarter on quarter.

Not Quite Unlimited

Airtel has defined “fair usage” levels for unlimited data transfer plans, and as users cross certain threshholds, the company will reduce speeds for the rest of the billing cycle by as much as 50%. Consequently, by controlling access speeds, they will limit the amount of data that users have access to. Download Airtel’s “Fair Usage” policy document here.

At an ASSOCHAM meeting on the new IT Act 2008 (Amended) a few weeks ago, I had asked about the institution of Net Neutrality in India – only to receive puzzled looks from those on the panel. It’s quite a co-incidence that the issue has reared its head in the country shortly thereafter. 

Why Such A Policy?

According to the LIRNEasia report submitted to the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), the speed of Airtels broadband connection deteriorates at multiple times in the day, notably, after 8pm. Download the comments here (related report here) We think that these are probably users who are downloading content overnight, and hence leech the bandwidth.

Frankly, we don’t think that should matter – if an ISP is offering a particular bandwidth and selling unlimited usage, they should provision for 100 percent utilization. Just because an ISP isn’t geared up to deliver on what they are selling doesn’t mean that they should institute such a discriminatory policy.

We’re wondering if Airtel is merely trying to weed out heavy users who may be responsible for a large amount of broadband bandwidth consumption. Most customers who will sign up for Airtel’s unlimited plans will not be aware of their “Fair Usage” policy, and they surely won’t be pleased when they learn about it when their access speed is limited. 

We’re in favour of neutral networks, and disagree with Airtel policy of modulating users access speeds.

In Line With Comments To TRAI


In their comments to the TRAI, Airtel had recommended giving Internet Service Providers the power to restrict the few bandwidth huggers’ from the pack who deteriorate the experience of the majority normal users. We’re not sure if the TRAI has accorded Airtel that power, but they appear to have gone ahead with that practice anyway.

On Monday, the TRAI announced that for broadband consumers, telecom operators must maintain a contention ratio of 1:50 — i.e. 50 users competing for the same bandwidth. 


— More on comments from ISPs to the TRAI, an details of contention ratio here.
— Petition against Airtel Fair Usage Policy
— Airtel’s Speed of Rationalization – Facebook ToS Style Goof Up

P.s.: Thanks for the tip-off Gopal. 

Share on Facebook0Tweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedIn0Email this to someone
  • Gopal

    Fine Airtel, if you want to take recourse to international norms then take recourse to all of it. Give us 2 Mbps unlimited plans at the equivalent of $10 a month. Don't throw at us stone-age era 256 kbps in the name of unlimited at $20 and then claim to adhere to international norms. A follow up question for them, perhaps.

    • Harsha J

      Gopal is absolutely correct. All Indian telecom operator cheat customer with poor service and quality. In true sense 256 kbps cannot be called as broadband.They don't have right to speak about international standard. Even if you are ready to pay more then also they dont assure a good speed. They are reluctant to invest on technology which helps customer..

  • VAS Guy

    In case of prepaid on mobile networks, you must be knowing that lifetime prepaid is not "for lifetime" instead some finite years of licenses of telecom operator.

    This seems like bad way of policing product's name by Indian authorities.

    Are they capable of understanding these issues at all ?

  • So, in a way, Airtel is saying that if we pay them extra, we can have any speed we choose. What a covert way of launching and selling their 'speed on demand' package! Is that why the speed rationalization letter that should actually be sent by the customer service team – is signed by the Marketing Head?

    Did not expect Airtel – of all the ISPs to goof so horrendously. They do NOT deserve the next year's buzziest brand tag by afaqs….and this fiasco will ensure that they come nowhere near that. If Facebook can learn and bow down to users, why can't Airtel…after what is Airtel if not for a large set of users?

  • Gaurav

    they will still have a large set of users. Don't think this move will effect more than may be 1-2% of users and will result in making room for may be 10-20% of more subscribers. Thus increasing the user base on the contrary :) .
    Does not mean I am in favor or capping. I am all for unlimited.

  • Rajiv

    How do you assume that limited bandwidth is the issue here?

  • Nagesh

    And that they can make room for more by suppressing the usage of a few? Do you have any idea how limited our bandwidth infrasructure is?