Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

VOIP to be Made Illegal in India

Posted by samzenpus on Wed Dec 06, 2006 11:19 PM
from the the-internet-is-not-for-talking dept.
Krish writes "Providers like Skype, Yahoo, Net2phone, Dialpad, etc. will not be able to offer VOIP in India under the proposed govt. clampdown. BPOs and other call centers will face the axe if they use any of the VOIP services provided by the above companies. It is not clear if this clampdown will affect regular home users."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by grub (11606) <slashdot@grub.net> on Wednesday December 06 2006, @11:24PM (#17141610) Homepage Journal

    Call your VOIP carrier's helpdesk and you might get hold of some guy in India.
    • Oblig (Score:4, Funny)

      by Swimport (1034164) on Thursday December 07 2006, @01:22AM (#17142406) Homepage
      If VOIP is illegal, only criminals will have VOIP.
    • Re:Oh the irony... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by siufish (814496) on Thursday December 07 2006, @03:21AM (#17143068)
      Why should it be otherwise?

      Ask yourself honestly: will you make any purchase decision based on whether the call centers are in India or in the US? How many times does it come up in your head when you are picking a VOIP carrier? Shopping for a digital camera? Deciding between a Amex or a Visa card?

      Now ask yourself the next question: will you make any purchase decision based on the price? If one VOIP costs $19.99/month and has call centers in India, and another costs $39.99/month and employs only American citizen call agents, which one will you choose?

      To businesses, call centers are "cost centers", and accordingly should be as cheap as possible. If they can make the same amount of money with cheaper call centers, they will. If customers don't care, they won't care.
      • Re:Oh the irony... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Bottlemaster (449635) on Thursday December 07 2006, @04:38AM (#17143440)
        Ask yourself honestly: will you make any purchase decision based on whether the call centers are in India or in the US? How many times does it come up in your head when you are picking a VOIP carrier? Shopping for a digital camera? Deciding between a Amex or a Visa card?
        I don't research these things when I make a purchase, but on the rare occassion that I have to call customer support for a product or service and am answered by someone who does not speak or understand English clearly enough to help me with my problem, I put that company on my blacklist and do not buy from them again. Honestly.

        To businesses, call centers are "cost centers", and accordingly should be as cheap as possible. If they can make the same amount of money with cheaper call centers, they will. If customers don't care, they won't care.
        If a company cares about customer service, they will hire (for their United States customers) support staff that can properly service someone who speaks the US variety of English. It's hard enough convincing Time Warner representatives located just a few miles from here that the problem is on their end. I'd cancel their service if I had to deal with a language barrier too. I guess this customer cares.
        • Re:Oh the irony... (Score:4, Insightful)

          by anothy (83176) on Thursday December 07 2006, @07:25AM (#17144206) Homepage
          i agree with this, but with a caveat.
          If a company cares about customer service, they will hire (for their United States customers) support staff that can properly service someone who speaks the US variety of English.
          this is true and vital, and plenty of companies have learned it, or are learning it now. but note that there's absolutely no reason why that person can't be Indian and in India. there are plenty of language schools in India that turn out people who're entirely fluent in english, including the american dialect.
          my experience working with engineers in India is that there's basically two ways companies can go about building a dev team in India. first, you can hire good engineers who cost aroudn 1/2 to 1/3 of what they'd cost in the US, and have at least roughly comparable skill levels. second, you can hire warm bodies who're engineers on paper, and you can get them for 1/5 to 1/10 of what similarly warm bodies would cost in the US. if whoever's in charge of hiring there understands that people are not fungible assets, you've got a good chance of getting a useful and productive team in India; if not, you're more or less screwed. my experience with customer support (other than as a customer) is more limited, but i have no reason to believe it's not the same there.
          i work with a guy who says things like "an indian could never understand me", where "understand" means "relate to". he gives examples of things like understanding baseball. wtf do i care if the customer support rep on the phone knows who won the Yankees game last night, regardless of where they are? there's legitimate points about language barrier and cultural differences impacting effective communication, and then there's flimsy rationalizations for stinking racism.
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          If a company cares about customer service, they will hire (for their United States customers) support staff that can properly service someone who speaks the US variety of English. It's hard enough convincing Time Warner representatives located just a few miles from here that the problem is on their end. I'd cancel their service if I had to deal with a language barrier too. I guess this customer cares.

          While there is some danger is using an Indian call center, it isn't as bad as people make it out to be. It
      • Re:Oh the irony... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by jamesh (87723) on Thursday December 07 2006, @05:37AM (#17143720)
        To businesses, call centers are "cost centers", and accordingly should be as cheap as possible. If they can make the same amount of money with cheaper call centers, they will. If customers don't care, they won't care.

        That bit about customers not caring is so true. But as soon as you start spending money outside of your community (village/city/stage/country), it's gone.

        People go and buy imported goods (and services now it seems) because they save a few dollars, and then bitch and moan because another factory has closed down and they're out of work. It's your own f*cking fault people!!! If you're lucky enough to live in a country that protects working conditions, then ffs don't go and buy stuff from a country that doesn't. You're only ripping yourselves off.

      • Re:Oh the irony... (Score:5, Interesting)

        by arivanov (12034) on Thursday December 07 2006, @05:52AM (#17143812) Homepage
        That may or may not be the case.

        1. The law has been in force for a very long time. Ask anyone who has actually done a proper costing and the legal aspects of outsourcing to India and they will tell you this.

        2. The law as such dissallows you to interface into a PBX or anything else which is also connected to the local network over there. In fact as far as the letter of law is concerned this is not that much different from telco regulations in many places around the world.

        3. The law does not dissallow you to host as many VOIP phones there as you like provided that they are off your own PBX located outside India and do not interface into the local phone network by any means. So a call center whose guts are located offshore is still fully legal. On(Indian)shore is very murky and it is not something call center outsourcers care about. After all the call center chickens working 10.5 hour shifts are usually not allowed local calls anyway.

        4. As far as Yahoo, Dialpad, etc are concerned they are simply required to be registered under the Indian telecoms regs to offer service. This for all practical purposes means that they or their subsidiaries will have to go under majority Indian ownerships. So much for WTO here (actually dunno if they are a member). In fact it is about time someone beat up India in terms of trade treaties and obligations on this.

        So overall, this law does not change anything as far as call centers are concerned. The Idian government is not mad to kill their primary GDP source. All it does is to ensure that the near-monopoly of Idian companies on the Idian telecoms market is retained for times to come.
      • Re:Oh the irony... (Score:4, Informative)

        by PaneerParantha (713034) on Thursday December 07 2006, @06:52AM (#17144064)
        People do not seem to have read the article.

        It doesn't say that VOIP will be banned in India, it says:

        1. Illegal Web calls by BPOs face axe

        2. Companies...not use the services of unlicensed foreign service providers such as Net2Phone, Vonage, Dialpad, Impetus, Novanet, Euros, Skype and Yahoo

        3. According to official sources, foreign players such as Skype, in addition to disturbing the level-playing field for bonafide licensees, were also causing great revenue loss to the government as they did not pay the 12% service tax and 6% revenue share on internet telephony.

        4. The government move, when implemented, will fulfil a long-pending demand of internet service providers (ISPs).

        5. ...call centres and BPOs can ensure that they are availing services from an authorised service provider.
        IOW, VOIP won't be banned but more regulated.

        The headline of this story is sensationalist.

  • by zappepcs (820751) on Wednesday December 06 2006, @11:26PM (#17141624) Journal
    of the uninformed to try to control what they have no clue about in order to protect outdated and now irrelevant business models... sigh
    • by Atlantis-Rising (857278) on Wednesday December 06 2006, @11:32PM (#17141678) Homepage
      ...that 'outdated and irrelevant business model' would be the government, seeing as they are, according to TFA, pissed off that the VOIP companies are not paying their taxes.
      • Your point being? ;)

        But seriously, this sounds like a violation of SOME trade agreement. Not everything people in your country use can be taxed all the time.
      • So when people play everquest and chat it should be taxable to?

        And the irony of the low cost labor provider of the world being mad because of low cost (FREE) products is priceless.
        • I don't think anybody said that. This is, however, not just some random decision by the Indian government to OMG CENSOR TEH INTARWEB TUBES! as the headline pretends.

          It's a standard, relatively sane, completely understandable move. Hell, I'm 90% sure the FCC has already done this.

          Now, there are a lot of reasons why it's not a good thing. But that doesn't detract from any of the above.

            • You've never heard of proposals to tax work done in video games? The theory is, work is being done, and value is being accumulated from it. Therefore, that value should be taxable.

              That is, after all, how taxes work.
        • by TheLink (130905) on Thursday December 07 2006, @03:45AM (#17143170) Journal
          "Gather a mob, shoot the bureaucrats between the eyes" "The world would be a better place if this happened more frequently."

          Really? It already happens a bit too frequently, and the world is a worse place for it.

          Typically it's the mob leaders who don't mind killing people who end up in power (because the "other options" end up dead - doh). And that's how people like Mao, Saddam Hussein, the leaders of Syria, Sudan, etc rise to the top - their opponents either get killed, jailed, or exiled. And that is why Karl Marx's Communism dreams tend to end up as nightmares - because he suggested violence as a means to communism.

          If you keep doing that once in a while if you get lucky you get a benevolent dictator or a dictator who somehow thinks that democractic elections are a good idea.

          But what are the odds? If you end up in such a scenario it may be better to just wait (leave or stay) and hope that the dictator picks successors who are less violent (which has a higher chance of happening, since the dictator will want to eliminate threats - e.g. others like him). Then when the time is right you make a move for mass civil disobedience - NOT violence and hope the soldiers will disobey as well.
  • by WhiteDragon (4556) on Wednesday December 06 2006, @11:29PM (#17141648) Homepage Journal
    I expected this was a phone company wanting to maintain their monopoly, but apparently it's the government wanting to capitalize on taxing VOIP services, and American (and other) providers are obviously not going to pay taxes to the government of India.
    • Lots of American multinationals pay taxes to foreign governments. In fact, the system of international taxation is mind-numbing. Although I think it might be shooting itself in the balls (by making Indian call centers more expensive), it's not surprising to see a government try to tax economic activity. To steal from Willie Sutton (an irony he certainly would have appreciated), "that's where the money is".

      Although the article was written in a foreign language (English with Indian TLAs), I gather that
  • Ask yourself, self, how could this happen?

    Some rich and powerful government leaders were sitting around saying, "How do we keep India poor?" After many weeks of deliberation (They aren't very intelligent, of course.) they decided, "That's it! We'll interfere with cheap communication."
  • by Somegeek (624100) on Wednesday December 06 2006, @11:47PM (#17141802)
    Another exciting headline that unfortunately has little to do with the truth.

    In the linked article it states that goal of the proposed legislation is that call centers are not going to be allowed to continue to use unlicensed VOIP. That is a huge difference from the Slashdot headline claiming that India is banning VOIP.

    India is quite happy to have them use domestic Indian VOIP providers thereby allowing the government to tax and regulate them. Much like we have in the US where the FCC regulates and taxes VOIP providers.

  • Time for some peaceful resistance, I think.

  • by sunsrin (842762) on Thursday December 07 2006, @03:06AM (#17143004) Homepage
    This is only for BPOs who might be using internet telephony without paying taxes to the Govt. FYI - Yahoo has been given the license to offer Internet telephony in India. Read here [infoworld.com] . They will be partnering with VSNL to route their calls.
  • by dindi (78034) on Thursday December 07 2006, @05:54AM (#17143820) Homepage
    When they make Voice Over IP illegal, you can switch to Voice over Frame Relay.

    I in fact know a call center that specifically has the technology, to avoid the proposed Voice over IP law in Costa Rica. Usually law makers are shortsighted with technology, so there is always a way around. :)

    • by Atlantis-Rising (857278) on Wednesday December 06 2006, @11:30PM (#17141658) Homepage
      The short answer: Tax money. VIOP providers were not paying it, so the government is making them illegal.
    • by stoolpigeon (454276) * <bittercode@gmail> on Wednesday December 06 2006, @11:30PM (#17141660) Homepage Journal
      they aren't banning it. they are banning the use of voip that comes from outside the country, doesn't pay taxes, isn't bound by Indian law, etc.
      • And that's exactly why we have strong cryptography.

        Government: You're illegally calling people.
        You: No, that's e-mail.
        Government: Oh.
        • Here's the revised Government with half a brain:

          Government: You're illegally calling people.
          You: No, that's e-mail.

          Government:You're sending e-mail for 8 hours a day and sending and receiving the same amount in email bytes?
          • Or even:

            Government: You're illegally calling people.
            You: No, that's e-mail.
            Government: Prove it, or go to jail.
            You: ...er...
            Government: Bye bye!
          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by Anonymous Coward
            Here's the British Government:

            Government: You're illegally calling people.
            You: No, that's e-mail.
            Government:Turn over the cryptographic keys so that we know it's email, or spend the next 30 years in jail.

            (that's right, in UK it's a crime to not turn over your cryptographic keys/passes.)
                • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

                  Frankly, it's nothing at all like self-incrimination, either legally or logically.

                  It's exactly like self-incrimination, both legally and logically. Law enforcement in the U.S. can seize the keys under a subpoena, but there is no requirement that you tell them where they are. In fact, the fifth amendment specifically allows someone not to answer any question for fear of self-incrimination. The question, "Where/What are the encryption keys?" would fall under that umbrella as it would potentially provide evide

                    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

                      However, in the case of an encrypted communication, the police are in possession of the evidence, they simply cannot read it. You are obligated to help them do that

                      That is out and out incorrect. Under U.S. law, you have a right to remain silent. Period, end of story, not a single thing more to add. You don't need to explain any knick knacks to them, you don't have to give them your keys to your house, and you sure as hell don't have to give them a codebook to your coded diary just because the cops think you

                    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

                      Sure. You have the right to remain silent... and the court has the right to throw you in jail for the rest of your life for contempt of court, and it has done so. The court has shown itself perfectly willing to impose a rolling punishment for contempt- i.e., they throw you in jail, and every year they bring you out and ask you if you're willing to comply. If you're not, they throw you back in.

                      Just in case anyone doubts the truth of this, Kay Skelton is locked away as I post on a contempt of court charge. Si
                    • by Nasarius (593729) on Thursday December 07 2006, @03:51AM (#17143196)
                      Irrelevant. Read the damn Constitution. It only protects you from being forced to testify against YOURSELF. Skelton is in jail for refusing to give information about SOMEONE ELSE.
                  • Then the government throws you in jail until it can forcibly decrypt the datastream, which is, if you're using a good cryptosystem, never.

                    That's why the british law is on the books- to prevent people from using systems exactly like this. Let's say you're charged with murder, but the evidence is locked up in this cryptostream. You can provide the keys, and have the government jail you for murder, or you can not provide the keys, the government, having no evidence, will drop the murder charge, and slam you wi
          • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

            Me: I like to keep my email bytes uniformly sized. It makes them flow through the tubes much more smoothly and prevents clogging.

            Government: But it's unintelligble noise, suspiciously like untaxed VOIP calls to Osama.

            Me: Ummm....and it prevents kiddy porn too.

            Government: Well in that case, someone ought to sponsor a bill right away. Good work, citizen.
      • In other words: they are going censor the internet because they can't tax a foreign company. Nice.
        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward

          In other words: they are going censor the internet because they can't tax a foreign company. Nice.

          The United States does that also. [wikipedia.org]

          The difference is, the Indian politicians are having a discussion and planning and what not. The US politicians just slipped the law into a "terrorism" bill at 9:30 p.m. the day before it got voted on, without discussion.

          So if you live in the US, don't get to upset with the Indian government. The Indians are probably more free than we are.

      • They are also attempting to ensure that all relevant emergency information is available to a call center should the need arise...Hard for 911 to find you if your call is routed via Uzbekistan, while you are in Auckland. There is also the issue of maintenance costs which are derived from licensee fee's.
    • by Maxo-Texas (864189) on Thursday December 07 2006, @12:16AM (#17142010)
      It used to be very expensive to build phone lines so they charged to make phone calls.

      Since they charged a large amount of money, it was convenient to put a tax on that charge.

      VoIP is basically free. If you want to pay someone for higher quality you can but there are so many ways to talk via voice over the internet now it's insane. I can't see how the indian government is going to do this against private individuals any more than they can stop porn, drugs, sex chat, etc.

      I think they can make businesses use taxable voip, but data is data for private people.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 06 2006, @11:38PM (#17141720)
      There needs to be something like a math problem presented as a slightly distorted image whenever you try to post on Slashdot. That way only those with reasonable intelligence can post.
    • by Atlantis-Rising (857278) on Wednesday December 06 2006, @11:50PM (#17141820) Homepage
      This has absolutely nothing to do with network neutrality. This has to do with companies that are doing business with Indian companies not paying Indian taxes.

      That is what is making the Indian government pissed. They are not trying to restrict VOIP for the hell of it. They just want what any government wants- to regulate it and tax it, and if they can't, to make it illegal and then extract fines from it.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        Why not tax instant messaging then ... I mean, thats communicating information across the internet too.

        ZOMG! People exchanging ideas! This is bad, they may get smart and overthrow our corrupt government!
            • Then you were not reading the article. Quoth the article:

              The government move, when implemented, will fulfil a long-pending demand of internet service providers (ISPs). Internet Service Providers Association of India president Rajesh Chharia said: "It is essential that the government seeks this undertaking from call centres as these foreign service providers do not possess the requisite licences as mandated by the Government of India for Indian ISPs."

              Once this proposal is implemented, the government, in case

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        There are other places (e.g., Philippines, Malaysia) that meet those requirements

        Malaysia (and Singapore) regularly outsource call center jobs to India. Should know; just got off the phone with someone from the National Kidney Foundation.

        I think this VoIP move by the Indian government reflects the reasons why call centre offshoring there has been a failure

        And yet, salaries are rising rapidly back in Hyderabad; folks getting 50% or a 100% raise is not unheard of. A top job in an Accenture in Singapor

      • Also, (Score:4, Insightful)

        by The Cydonian (603441) on Thursday December 07 2006, @02:04AM (#17142594) Homepage Journal
        India is really a pretty xenophobic place, generally hostile to most everything non-Indian.

        The thing that really struck me the most in "new" India, all those malls and food courts and stuff, is how prevalent Chinese food is, among other things. Granted, Indian Chinese isn't quite Chinese as I know :-D, but I've travelled to Hong Kong and throughout most parts of South East Asia, and I don't think I've seen the reverse happening.

        India's opening up faster than most ex-pat Indians realize.

        India is deeply conservative and fearful of change.

        We've got the world's largest twenty-something population. Half the country is my age, 24.

        The Indian educational system penalises innovation and creative thinking.

        Which of the twenty-seven or so educational systems are you talking about? If it is the CBSE or the ICSE, then you'd be hardpressed to explain why they follow it in some schools here in Singapore, or in West Asia and southern Africa, in Tanzania, Kenya and, I understand, South Africa. The educational system per se isnt soul-ripping, but the competition is; never, however, doubt the intent of some of the better designed systems.

        Indian politics are always parochial. If a proposal doesn't somehow poke a stick in the eye of those bastards in the next village/city/state/country, then it's not going to pass.

        :-)

        I take it that you haven't worked with these lobbyists? The problem with Indian politics is that it's a huge superset of local politics glued together somehow under the Indian tricolour; the difficulty is in having a larger picture, or in convincing folks to look beyond their backyards. I doubt anybody is malicious though, in their intent; there is a lot of good work being done, albeit slowly. I think we're about to hit the corner in a year or so when folks start demanding action at a national level as well.

        Tough work, but there are reasons to be optimistic. All is not lost.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        Some broad generalisations that I will stand behind:

        * India is really a pretty xenophobic place, generally hostile to most everything non-Indian.
        * India is deeply conservative and fearful of change.
        * The Indian educational system penalises innovation and creative thinking.
        * Indian politics are always parochial. If a proposal doesn't somehow poke a stick in the eye of those bastards in the next

    • Re:Funny as hell (Score:5, Insightful)

      by smallpaul (65919) <paulNO@SPAMprescod.net> on Thursday December 07 2006, @01:52AM (#17142512)

      Actually, when I read this, I couldn't help but laugh at all of the dumb companies that thought that they could save money by investing in [India]

      There is no question that companies are saving (and making) money by investing billions in India. A few VOIP taxes are not going to change that.

      [India] is still, essentially, a third world country.

      Nobody said otherwise. India is a developing economy. You have a very strange understanding of economics if you think that you cannot make money in a developing economy. Look at the bushfulls of money that have been made in the last 50 years in (e.g.) Korea, Saudi Arabia, Ireland, China, etc.

      They should've realized that a few McDonald's and a rudimentary grasp of English doesn't make a country a first world country, (a good place to do business).

      Rapidly growing economies are precisely where you go to do business.

      I hope the backwater Indian government continues to tax "outsiders" in their own provincial way so that these stupid companies will learn their lessons.

      America's backwater government also taxes "outsiders" in a provicial way. Haven't you heard about Bush's protectionism: http://www.progress.org/2003/trade12.htm [progress.org]

      I think that India has a LONG way to go before it should be considered as any kind of technological powerhouse, and I think that this is a strong sign that that is true.

      India's software industry alone is worth $20 billion. Tata infotech took 23 years to make its first billion and 23 months to make its second. Is that a powerhouse comparable to the American industry? Probably not. Does it matter? India's tech industry is strong, healthy and growing, no matter how much you might wish otherwise. Save your schadenfreude for someone who deserves it. You might want to read this to learn what's really going on in India: http://www.economist.com/business/PrinterFriendly. cfm?story_id=5300960 [economist.com]