We have been following the emotionally loaded net neutrality debate for some time with some detachment. Our research clearly shows that low prices are critical if the BOP is to join the Internet economy and that low prices are not sustainable without the adaptation of the budget telecom network model to broadband supply.
One of the most controversial of the recommendations that came out of this work is that which said one should go gentle on regulating quality. The main reason we said that was because we believed that the poor needed access in the form of different price-quality bundles; that if high quality standards were imposed by fiat, the only victims would be the price-sensitive consumers who would get priced out. While we did not take an explicit position on net neutrality those days, we now have to, based on what we have learned. We do not believe net neutrality is appropriate for emerging economies, especially for the BOP.
Major decision has come down from the US courts on the Obama appointees’ attempt to mandate net neutrality by law:
A federal appeals court ruled on Tuesday that regulators had limited power over Web traffic under current law. The decision will allow Internet service companies to block or slow specific sites and charge video sites like YouTube to deliver their content faster to users.
The court decision was a setback to efforts by the Federal Communications Commission to require companies to give Web users equal access to all content, even if some of that content is clogging the network.
3 Comments
Abu Saeed Khan
“Confused? You are not alone,” said Martyn Warwick of Telecom TV.
Waqas Hassan
The developed world is fearsome of the fact that net neutrality will create a ‘class-system’ among the Internet Community which is against the openness and access-for-all mission of Internet stakeholders. However, for under developed makets, disagreement with net neutrality can actually bring down the basic Internet User’s cost of service. Therefore, Net Neeutrality may not be the best policy for developing countries.
Balancing privacy and transparency: Thailand’s data governance at a crossroads
In an op-ed article published on 20 February 2026 in the Bangkok Post, Jompon Pitaksantayothin, Country Researcher for Thailand for LIRNEasia’s D4D Asia project, discusses the growing tensions within Thailand’s data governance framework following the introduction of the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA). While the PDPA was intended to strengthen privacy protections, its interaction with existing transparency laws has created confusion within government agencies about what information can be disclosed.
Can Copyright Law still serve the public interest in the age of AI?
The rapid evolution of Artificial Intelligence is reshaping debates around copyright, accessibility, and innovation. In a recent article published in The Hindu, Pranesh Prakash, Co-Principal Investigator for LIRNEasia’s D4D Asia Project, discusses how copyright law must adapt to the realities of AI-driven technologies in a way that balances creators’ rights with the public interest.
Harnessing Data for Democratic Development in South and Southeast Asia: Pakistan Country Report
This report on data governance in Pakistan is part of the “Harnessing Data for Democratic Development in South and Southeast Asia” (D4DAsia) project, which aims, inter alia, to create and mobilize new knowledge about the tensions, gaps, and evolution of the data governance ecosystem, taking into account both formal and informal policies and practices. This report is also part of a broader comparative effort that includes case studies from India, Indonesia, Nepal, South Korea, Thailand, and the Philippines.
Links
User Login
Themes
Social
Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feed
Contact
9A 1/1, Balcombe Place
Colombo 08
Sri Lanka
+94 (0)11 267 1160
+94 (0)11 267 5212
info [at] lirneasia [dot] net
Copyright © 2026 LIRNEasia
a regional ICT policy and regulation think tank active across the Asia Pacific