Network Neutrality () refers to a network wherein participants are effectively blind to the nature of data flowing through the network. Another way of defining NN is a network wherein participants are restricted from differential treatment of data flow. Please understand that the definitions provided above are, in cliché speak, two sides of the same coin. Even if a participant can distinguish the nature of data flowing through a network, the participant is considered to be effectively blind, if said participant doesn’t interfere with the data flow. I have discussed the basic concepts and issues surrounding NN here.
[Ed Note: This post is the first part of a two part series authored by Vaibhav Laddha, a student of NALSAR University of Law.]
Technology product markets today are inherently international. Products designed in Germany may be manufactured in Korea or China and sold in India. This cross-cutting global nature of technological products has created a need for standardisation to ensure technical interoperability. Some standards which ensure this are WiFi (wireless networking), MP3 (digital content encoding), 4G (wireless telecommunications), etc. These standards reduce communication costs and increase efficiency. For this reason, various standard setting organisations (SSOs) have been formed who primarily facilitate coordination between different stakeholders in a market by setting standards.
[Ed Note: This post is the second part of a two part series authored by Vaibhav Laddha, a student of NALSAR University of Law. The first part can be found here.]
The Indian telecommunications market is one of the largest in the world, and therefore becomes an important market for the key participants in the telecommunications industry. Indian jurisprudence on FRAND practices for SEPs is underdeveloped at this stage, with a handful of decisions by the Delhi High Court and the Competition Commission of India. The rules that govern SEP have not been clearly defined, and the positions adopted by the Delhi High Court and the Competition Commission of India have differed greatly.
One of the most discussed topics in the world today is how much we can trust the sources of news around us. Fake news seems to be running rampant and it is obvious that we have to evaluate how much faith to put in what we read. That being said, the situation becomes considerably worse when several viewpoints on contemporary problems are removed from the conversation entirely, which seems to be becoming a common occurrence on social media sites. YouTube in particular has been repeatedly associated with this trend. Since its ascension to one of the premium sources for news and information, with viewers gaining information as per their own convenience and hearing different opinions on issues, it has fast been accepted as a stalwart of social media. It is no secret that YouTube has had several problems with content regulation in its 13-year lifespan, the most recent of these being the removal of advertisements from videos deemed ‘unsuitable for advertisers’, thereby preventing their creators from earning money in an event that has come to be known as the ‘YouTube Adpocalpyse’. It appears that YouTube is now going one step further, with the outright removal of several videos from the platform.
The “employee” at JP Morgan called COIN, “recruited” in June 2017, is highly efficient to say the least. It does work that earlier took 3,60,000 hours in a matter of seconds. Meanwhile, in a few developed countries ghost cars that are programmed to “drive themselves”, that is, driverless cars, are hitting the roads. On the military front, among other machines, Russia has created a semi – autonomous robot soldier called Ivan that can accurately copy the movements of a human. Attempts are being made to make Ivan fully autonomous. If Russia can create one Ivan, in time, it can also create an army of Ivans. USA also has similar “soldiers”.