Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 16 FEBRUARY 2016

Sorry Mark, No "Free Basics" Here - Says India

LexCounsel
LexCounsel
Contributor
LexCounsel

LexCounsel

LexCounsel is a New Delhi-based full service law firm with an office in Bhubaneswar and associate...

View firm profile
Explore more from LexCounsel

The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India ("TRAI"), the Indian regulator for telecom services has effectively said ‘NO' to operation of "Free Basics" and similar platforms in India.

IndiaMedia, Telecoms, IT, Entertainment
Alishan Naqvee
Alishan Naqvee
Manasi Chatpalliwar
Manasi Chatpalliwar
Author LinkedIn connections

The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India ("TRAI"), the Indian regulator for telecom services has effectively said 'NO' to operation of "Free Basics" and similar platforms in India. TRAI has proposed the soon to be notified "Prohibition of Discriminatory Tariffs for Data Services Regulations, 2016" ("the Regulations") along with an Explanatory Memorandum. The Regulations prohibit operation in India of platforms such as "Free Basics" over apprehension of their interference with the principles of "net neutrality".

"Free Basics", a platform by Facebook, advocated fervently by its CEO, Mark Zuckerberg has faced vehement opposition by net neutrality supporters in India. The social media backlash earlier forced an Indian e-tailing giant Flipkart, to pull out of its participation in "Airtel Zero", a platform by Airtel, the leading telecom service provider ("TSP") in India. Zuckerberg also met the Indian Prime Minister in India and abroad, and conducted a Townhall meeting

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

Instagram’s 2026 AI Labelling Rules

Instagram's 2026 policy shift introduces mandatory AI-generated profile labels and penalties for non-disclosure, creating new compliance challenges at the intersection of platform governance and India's statutory framework for synthetically generated information. How do these overlapping regimes affect brands, influencers, and content creators operating in India's digital ecosystem?
IndiaMedia, Telecoms, IT, Entertainment
Global Advertising Lawyers Alliance (GALA)
Global Advertising Lawyers Alliance (GALA)
Article

Telegram Ban In India – The Rise Of Digital Sovereignty

The Delhi High Court's landmark ruling in Telegram FZ LLC v. Union of India addresses whether Section 69A of the IT Act permits the government to block an entire platform rather than specific content. Following the NEET-UG 2026 paper leak scandal, where fraudulent channels circulated fake exam papers affecting millions of aspirants, the court upheld the Centre's power to impose a platform-wide ban on Telegram, sparking intense debate about the boundaries between examination integrity and digital censorship.
IndiaMedia, Telecoms, IT, Entertainment
Hammurabi & Solomon Partners
Hammurabi & Solomon Partners
Article

The Promotion And Regulation Of Online Gaming Act, 2025 And The Promotion And Regulation Of Online Gaming Rules, 2026

The Act, the Rules and the OGAI are therefore simultaneously operational. The prohibition provisions under Chapter III of the Act, the criminal penalties under Chapter V of the Act and the institutional framework under the Rules are all in effect. There is effectively no formal compliance window for core prohibitions and penalties; stakeholders should treat the regime as immediately operational and adjust business models without delay.
IndiaMedia, Telecoms, IT, Entertainment
King, Stubb & Kasiva
King, Stubb & Kasiva
Article

Is Meta Still Just An Intermediary? Why India Is Rethinking Safe Harbour

In mid-September 2026, government sources said Meta Platforms’ Indian operations, Facebook, Instagram and Threads, should no longer be viewed merely as an “internet intermediary” but should also be treated as a “service provider,” arguing that the company’s monetised algorithms actively decide what content gets amplified, distributed and shown to whom. That is a government position, not a new statutory classification, and this article returns to that distinction below.
IndiaMedia, Telecoms, IT, Entertainment
S.S. Rana & Co.
S.S. Rana & Co.
Article

DOT Notifies Telecom Network Authorisation Rules, 2026: What Has Changed?

On 20 July 2026, the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) notified the Telecommunications (Authorisation for Telecommunication Network) Rules, 2026 (Rules). The Rules operationalise Section 3(1)(b) of the Telecommunications Act, 2023 and establish a framework for six categories of telecommunication network authorisations: infrastructure provider (IP) (formerly, IP-I), digital connectivity infrastructure provider (DCIP), internet exchange point (IXP) provider, satellite earth station gateway (SESG) provider, cloud-hosted telecommunication network (CTN) provider and mobile number portability (MNP) provider.
IndiaMedia, Telecoms, IT, Entertainment
Khaitan & Co.
Khaitan & Co.
Article

No Private University To Operate As A Profit-Making Institution: Supreme Court’s Recent Order

The Supreme Court vide its recent order dated September 17, 2026 (“Order”) in the matter of Ayesha Jain v. Amity University, Noida & Ors., [W.P. (C) No. 531/2025] came down heavily on the manner of operation of universities and issued a series of stringent directions requiring greater disclosure by universities, including with respect to their finances, admissions, staffing, grievance redressal and regulatory compliance
IndiaFinance and Banking
LexCounsel
LexCounsel