Net neutrality & Covid-19: trends in LAC and Asia Pacific | IGF 2023

Audience

During the conversation, Javier begins by expressing gratitude to the person he is speaking to in various languages, such as “gracias” in Spanish and “ciao” in Italian. He then bids farewell using the phrases “nos vemos” and “bye-bye.”

Javier then brings up the topic of drafts, suggesting that he believes the woman he is speaking to has some. However, he appears uncertain about this assumption, repeating the statement “I think she has drafts” to indicate his lack of certainty.

The purpose of discussing this topic seems to be to engage in conversation and explore ideas related to drafts. However, the conversation stalls as the woman repeatedly uses the phrase “Creo que…” to share her thoughts, indicating her own uncertainty or hesitation in expressing a definitive opinion.

These exchanges highlight the tentative nature of their conversation and the absence of concrete information or consensus regarding drafts. It appears that they are both searching for common ground or a clearer understanding of the subject matter.

Overall, this conversation offers insights into the interpersonal dynamics and communication style between Javier and the woman, as well as their shared uncertainty about the existence of drafts and their desire to engage in conversation.

Piero Guasta Leyton

The discussions surrounding net neutrality and non-discrimination in the context of trade are considered to be of utmost importance. Piero, for instance, perceives these discussions as key, particularly when it comes to the trade aspect. However, it is often observed that these subjects tend to be overshadowed by more popular topics.

In terms of protecting internet-related aspects, such as free data flows and net neutrality, it is argued that these aspects should be safeguarded rather than implemented. It is contended that these key principles already exist, and the goal should be to ensure their protection. Trade agreements play a crucial role in achieving this objective, as they should aim to guarantee the preservation of these principles.

Similarly, non-discrimination is highlighted as a principal aim in trade. The notion of providing equal opportunities for all participants and market entrants is key. Notably, during the pandemic, specific measures were not required due to the existence of non-discriminatory regulations. Moreover, the measures taken by countries during the pandemic were generally deemed permissible from a trade perspective.

Moreover, net neutrality policies are attributed with having a positive impact on market competition and consumer choices, particularly in the case of Chile. These policies have facilitated the entry of various technological products into the Chilean market, making it more attractive and competitive.

In summary, the discussions surrounding net neutrality, non-discrimination, and internet-related aspects are seen as critical in the trade domain. Protecting and preserving these principles through trade agreements can help ensure equal opportunities and foster market competitiveness. Furthermore, the positive impact of net neutrality policies on market competition and consumer choices, as evidenced by the Chilean example, highlights the importance of these topics for further discussion and promotion.

Javiera Cáceres Bustamante

Net neutrality is a critical principle for ensuring equal access to the internet and plays a crucial role in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). It prevents discrimination by internet service providers, ensuring that all users have equal access to different sites and applications. By maintaining an open and level playing field, net neutrality fosters equitable opportunities for individuals and businesses.

Net neutrality holds significant potential in contributing to the SDGs, particularly SDG 4 (Quality Education) and SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth). It can ensure access to online educational resources and platforms, enabling individuals to acquire knowledge and skills necessary for quality education. Additionally, net neutrality can facilitate job creation in digital environments, supporting the goal of achieving decent work and economic growth.

The COVID-19 pandemic further highlighted the importance of net neutrality. While exceptional measures, such as traffic management for emergencies and prioritisation of access to critical digital services, were implemented during the pandemic, they were seen as compatible with the principle of net neutrality. These measures aimed to ensure that essential services and information were accessible to all, emphasising the significance of net neutrality in times of crisis.

The Pacific Alliance, comprising four countries, has made notable progress in implementing net neutrality. It has set a precedent by incorporating this principle into an international treaty, demonstrating a shared commitment to ensuring equal access to the internet. The experiences of the Pacific Alliance can provide valuable insights for other economies, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region, seeking to regulate net neutrality effectively.

Network slicing, a complex and evolving topic, is closely associated with net neutrality. It involves dividing a network into multiple virtual networks to optimise resources and provide tailored services based on application requirements. While some view network slicing as a means to enhance safety and efficiency in services like autonomous driving, it poses challenges in terms of maintaining net neutrality. Therefore, careful regulation is necessary to prevent backdoor violations of net neutrality in the context of network slicing.

Investigating how companies comply with net neutrality is crucial and provides valuable insights for future research. Understanding the extent to which companies adhere to net neutrality principles can inform policymakers and regulators in designing effective strategies and policies to ensure equal access and prevent discriminatory practices in the digital landscape.

In conclusion, net neutrality plays a vital role in ensuring equitable access to the internet and contributes to the achievement of SDGs such as quality education and decent work. Exceptional measures during the COVID-19 pandemic have underscored the compatibility of net neutrality with prioritising critical services. The Pacific Alliance stands as a successful model for incorporating net neutrality into international treaties, while network slicing necessitates careful regulation to avoid violations. Investigating compliance with net neutrality provides valuable insights for future research and policy development in the digital realm.

Dilmar Villena Fernández Baca

The analysis examines the impact of net neutrality on internet usage in Peru during the COVID-19 pandemic. It underscores that the internet infrastructure was unprepared for the surge in information flow caused by the pandemic, resulting in network overload. To address this issue, the Peruvian government allowed operators to prioritize certain data packages through emergency actions. This was done to alleviate the strain on the network caused by increased device usage for work and entertainment during the pandemic.

One argument presented is that the exceptions made by the Peruvian government to net neutrality regulations were necessary to adapt to changes in internet usage patterns. For example, the government developed the ‘Aprendo en Casa’ platform to provide educational materials to students. Telecommunication companies were given the flexibility to prioritize data packages related to remote work and learning. This decision aimed to ensure uninterrupted access to essential services, such as online education, during the pandemic.

However, the analysis also highlights concerns about selective zero-rating in Peru. Zero-rating refers to exempting certain data packages from usage limits or charges. The stance put forward is that Peruvian regulations permit zero-rating as long as it is not done arbitrarily. However, compliance with this regulation varied among telecom companies. Several operators did not fully adhere to transparency guidelines, which require them to be transparent about zero-rating. Only one major operator in Peru was found to be fully compliant during the pandemic. This non-compliance and lack of transparency generated a negative sentiment regarding the implementation of net neutrality regulations in Peru.

The analysis also reveals the impact of net neutrality on non-traditional forms of work, such as gamers and streamers. It argues that prioritizing conventional work-related traffic penalized these workers, as their data flow requirements were not adequately met. This aspect highlights a potential downside of prioritizing certain types of internet traffic during periods of increased network strain.

Furthermore, the analysis extends beyond Peru and highlights compliance with net neutrality among telecommunication companies in the Pacific Alliance. Despite being the same corporations, compliance varied across different countries in the Pacific Alliance. An example mentioned is Intelcom, a Chilean company operating in Peru, not fully complying with net neutrality transparency guidelines. This observation emphasizes the need for consistent implementation of net neutrality regulations across borders.

In conclusion, the analysis provides valuable insights into the challenges of net neutrality during the COVID-19 pandemic in Peru. It reveals the strain on internet infrastructure, the regulatory exceptions made by the Peruvian government, concerns about selective zero-rating, and compliance issues among telecom companies. The analysis emphasizes the importance of maintaining a balance between prioritizing essential services and ensuring equal access to the internet for all users.

Olga Cavalli

Argentina does not have specific regulations on net neutrality, but its national law on digital services indirectly upholds the principles of network neutrality. The law includes two articles that guarantee network neutrality for the services in place, ensuring equal treatment of all online traffic. However, challenges arise regarding the distribution and concentration of internet traffic, particularly on streaming services, which can result in unequal treatment of other online services. Additionally, the practice of zero-rating in mobile services packages, where certain services like WhatsApp are exempted from data charges while others are not, raises concerns about fair treatment. Moreover, the inclusion of IoT devices in mobile networks, such as 5G, raises questions about the feasibility of network neutrality due to the possibility of treating different types of traffic differently for functionality. Some argue that this approach may violate net neutrality, especially when it comes to time-sensitive traffic from IoT devices like autonomous cars. Good regulation is vital to enable services for consumers and service providers, taking into account the rapid changes in the technological environment. It should provide room for future updates and improvements while ensuring fairness for all parties involved. In conclusion, while Argentina indirectly supports network neutrality through its national law on digital services, challenges persist and require careful consideration and regulation to ensure fair and equal access to the internet and foster innovation in the digital services sector.

Raquel Gatto

Net neutrality has emerged as a significant issue in Brazil, necessitating the implementation of regulations to safeguard the rights of internet users. In 2014, Brazil enacted a law that aimed to protect user rights on the internet without subjecting them to criminal charges. This law allowed for the use of the internet as a means to safeguard and uphold these rights.

The Marcos Review, also known as the Brazilian Bill of Rights, was formulated through public consultations and online discussions. This inclusive approach ensured that the opinions and perspectives of a wide range of stakeholders were taken into account. The Marcos Review enshrined net neutrality as a fundamental principle in Brazil’s internet governance framework.

However, the Marcos Review also acknowledges that there can be exceptions to the principle of net neutrality in certain circumstances. For example, it recognizes the need for traffic control and the prioritisation of emergency-essential services. These exceptions are carefully defined and implemented to ensure that they do not undermine the overall principle of net neutrality and the protection of user rights.

The Brazilian Internet community, known as NIC.br, plays a significant role in defining and implementing these exceptions. This organisation works closely with various stakeholders to ensure that the exceptions are justified, transparent, and in the best interest of internet users. By involving the Brazilian Internet community, the regulatory framework surrounding net neutrality becomes more accountable and responsive to the needs and concerns of the public.

Overall, the sentiment surrounding net neutrality in Brazil is neutral. There is a call for cautious monitoring of any exceptions to the principle of net neutrality. This suggests that there is a recognition of the importance of balancing the needs for regulation and protection of user rights, while also maintaining an open and equitable internet environment.

In conclusion, net neutrality is a significant concern in Brazil, and the country has taken significant steps to address it through regulations and the Marcos Review. The law passed in 2014 allows for the protection of user rights without criminalising them, and the Marcos Review ensures that net neutrality is upheld as a principle while also allowing for carefully defined exceptions. By involving the Brazilian Internet community in the process, Brazil’s regulatory framework aims to provide a balanced and accountable approach to net neutrality.

Felipe Muñoz Navia

During the session, the topic of network slicing with 5G and its potential impact on net neutrality laws was discussed in depth. Network slicing, which involves dividing a physical network into multiple virtual networks, allows for the creation of different logical networks on the same hardware. This innovation opens up new possibilities for enhanced mobile broadband, massive machine type communication for Internet of Things (IoT), and ultra-reliable low-latency services.

However, it was acknowledged that network slicing could potentially affect net neutrality at lower levels that may not be covered by existing laws. The speakers emphasised the need for careful analysis and updates to technical drafts that accompany these laws. They proposed that laws should be updated to cover potential violations of net neutrality that may occur beneath the routing, ensuring that the principles of an open and unbiased internet are upheld.

The session concluded that advancements in technology call for laws and technical drafts to be revised and adapted to accommodate these changes. The speakers highlighted the importance of net neutrality in maintaining an internet ecosystem that fosters innovation, competition, and equal access to information. Therefore, thorough evaluation and consideration of network slicing’s implications on net neutrality are necessary to prevent any unintended consequences.

In summary, network slicing with 5G offers various benefits for logical networks, but it also poses challenges to net neutrality at lower levels. Updating laws and technical drafts is vital to uphold net neutrality and safeguard fairness and equality in the digital space. Proper analysis and adjustments are necessary to accommodate technological advancements and maintain the integrity of net neutrality in all aspects of network infrastructure.

Ignacio Sánchez González

Net neutrality is an essential principle that has received substantial attention and regulation in various countries and international treaties. Specifically, the Pacific Alliance, consisting of Chile, Colombia, Peru, and Mexico, has acknowledged the significance of net neutrality by enacting it into their national laws. Furthermore, the Pacific Alliance as an organization has extended the scope of net neutrality by incorporating it into their trade protocol, setting a noteworthy precedent in international public law.

In Brazil, net neutrality is also a major topic of discussion, seen as a crucial element of internet rights and legislation. This highlights the need for comprehensive regulations to ensure proper implementation of net neutrality. Key to this is incorporating exceptions in regulations, as they play a vital role in striking a balance between preserving net neutrality and addressing specific circumstances that may require different treatment.

However, a critical concern is the lack of an active monitoring body that ensures compliance with net neutrality principles. Despite having legislation and dispute settlement mechanisms in place, the absence of continuous monitoring hampers effective implementation. This poses a challenge in ensuring that internet service providers (ISPs) adhere to net neutrality principles and refrain from discriminatory practices.

Additionally, the interaction between net neutrality and network slicing is a relevant aspect to consider. Network slicing is a technique used to accommodate specific technical requirements, such as low latency for critical services like autonomous driving. Whether network slicing complies with net neutrality principles largely depends on the application and intent behind its implementation. This highlights the importance of regulating and monitoring net neutrality and network slicing practices to prevent preferential treatment or discrimination by ISPs.

In summary, net neutrality is a vital principle for maintaining an open and equal internet environment. Its regulation in various countries and international treaties, particularly within the Pacific Alliance, demonstrates the global recognition of its importance. To effectively implement net neutrality, comprehensive regulations should be in place, including exceptions that strike a balance. Moreover, active monitoring mechanisms are necessary to ensure compliance and prevent discriminatory practices. Overall, the regulation and monitoring of net neutrality and network slicing are critical for safeguarding the principles of an open and fair internet.

Ignacio Sánchez González:
Hello. Good afternoon, everybody. Thank you very much for coming. On behalf of the Institute of International Studies of the University of Chile, we are holding now the session called Net Neutrality and COVID-19 Trends in Latin America and the Caribbean and the Asia-Pacific. First of all, I want to thank all the people who have joined the panel, Raquel Gato, Olga Cavalli, Dilmar Villena, and our online speakers also, Javier Cáceres, Felipe Muñoz, and Piero Huasta. So we will talk now about why is net neutrality important for our countries, why are we making a link between Latin America and specifically the Pacific Alliance within Latin America, and why we are linking it with the Asia-Pacific. We will address a global discussion, comparative regional processes regarding net neutrality. And for instance, just to start the conversation, the presentation of the paper that Professor Javier Cáceres and Felipe Muñoz will make, they will talk about, for instance, that an important outcome is that the four members of the Pacific Alliance, which are Chile, Colombia, Peru, and Mexico, the four of them have regulated in law the principle of net neutrality, and that had as a result that the Pacific Alliance, as an organization and in the trade protocol, they set the principle of net neutrality in an international treaty, setting an important precedent in international public law. That’s why our first presenters will present the paper, Net Neutrality Exceptionality, a look into the Pacific Alliance countries during the COVID-19 pandemic and lessons for Asia-Pacific economies. This paper is now in press in the framework of the call for proposals of the UN Economic and Social Commission for the Asia-Pacific, UNCTAD, the United Nations Industrial Development Organization, and ARTNET. And this call for papers is called Unleashing Digital Trade and Investment for Sustainable Development. The presenters of the paper, I will present every speaker when the time to talk arrives. Our first presenters are Professor Javier Cáceres-Bustamante, who is also one of the authors of the paper. She is an instructor professor at the Institute of International Studies of the University of Chile, and also a PhD fellow at the London School of Economics and Political Science. And Professor Felipe Muñoz, an associate professor of the Institute of International Studies of the University of Chile. The two professors and I are the authors of this paper, which will start the conversation of this principle in our region. So Professor Cáceres and Professor Muñoz, thank you very much for joining us online. And please, whenever you want, you can start and present this research topic on net neutrality. Thank you, Ignacio. Good afternoon and good morning to all

Javiera Cáceres Bustamante:
of those participating either on site or virtually in this panel. I don’t know if you can see my PPT, because I asked Piero if you could project it. I don’t know if, Piero, yeah. Yeah, now we can see it. You can see it? Okay, perfect. Okay, so first, I would like to thank you, Ignacio, for convening such an interesting session. It is my pleasure to share with you the finding of our research project, as you were saying, specifically on net neutrality, exceptionality, and the Pacific alliance, and how, from this experience, some lessons can be taken for other economies, including those of the Asia-Pacific. I’m going to be presenting. Felipe is here too, but I’ll be the one presenting. Next, please. First, we’ll start with an introduction that you can see on screen. While it’s not new that the information and telecommunications revolution has changed the paradigms of production, consumption, and even social interactions, the COVID-19 pandemic allowed us to witness the extent of the internet as an essential tool for individuals and businesses. So, in a moment dominated by restrictions on social distancing, So, in a moment dominated by restrictions on social distancing, digital tools enabled people to connect and collaborate with others across the globe. During the pandemic, as we all know, the importance of the internet as an essential tool for people, businesses, and the digital economy has surged. So, several activities turned into digital environments as a consequence of the pandemic, ranging from, for example, remote working and education to the rise of e-commerce, or the increased use of digital platforms, too, for social communication and leisure activities. So, in this context, our research focuses on studying how the Pacific Alliance economies have regulated and managed the principle of net neutrality during the COVID-19 pandemic in order to draw some ideas that may provide insightful information for policymakers or using net neutrality principle during exceptional circumstances. Next, please. Now, this is a bit of kind of a theoretical framework or literature review. So, I don’t know. Yeah, there. According to Tim Wu, internet service providers, ISP, should be required to treat all internet traffic equally without discriminating or charging different based on user, content, website, platform, application, type of attached equipment, or method of communication. So, this is the basis of the net neutrality principle. If not, as this author argued, internet service providers could become internet gatekeepers, controlling access to information and stifling competition and innovation. So, this principle seeks to prevent internet services providers from blocking or slowing down access to websites or applications or charging consumers extra fees for faster or prioritized access to specific sites or applications. So, net neutrality can be defined as essential to ensure that the internet remains an open and level playing field where all users have equal access of information and to services. So, for this reason and to provide stronger regulatory framework, we can see that some countries have already decided to incorporate the net neutrality principle as part of their negotiating mandates in their free trade agreement negotiations, including, as the case of analysis that we are presenting, the economies of the Pacific Alliance. Next, please. Here we see a little bit more of information regarding net neutrality and COVID. So, as I already mentioned, the use of the internet skyrocketed due to the rise of COVID pandemic. So, the population used the internet for communication and leisure purposes, including video calls and streaming services. Various activities moved into virtual environments. So, the increasing usage of network limited the capabilities of internet services providers to provide the required broadband width. So, this problem was particularly relevant in developing economies and rural areas and for those who did not have the access to broadband land connections or latest generation mobile connections. So, to ensure that citizens get access to the internet, particularly those that are digital and digital enabled services considered critical, governments impose different measures and policies like zero rating or the price discrimination between digital packages in which companies may discriminate regarding the price they will charge for a specific content prioritization. Both type of measures that could be understood as inconsistent with net neutrality principles. Next, please. But also, there is important to see here that net neutrality should not only be seen as a technical issue related to the governance of the internet, but also as a tool for development. So, while there is no specific reference to the net neutrality principle within SDGs, it can be stated that the net neutrality principle might promote more equitable access to the internet, but not allowing discrimination concerning access to various contexts distributed in a digital environment. So, hence, the relationship between net neutrality and the SDGs becomes significant as the internet has proven to be an essential tool for achieving SDGs. Here, we can see on screen some examples of how net neutrality could help the achievement of SDGs are shown here. So, we have first, for example, that we might think about SDG 4, which is quality of education and the need to access educational resources and online learning platforms, for example, or SDG 8, which is decent work and economic growth and the increased job creation in digital environments. So, we can see that both activities are dependent on the access to the internet for which any discrimination by internet services providers could hinder the capabilities of the population to participate in that. Next, please. Thank you. So, the Pacific Alliance becomes an interesting case study as the regional bloc has established as one of its main working objectives the construction of a regional digital market. Various presidential and ministerial declarations and roadmaps have been elaborated towards achieving this objective in which those instruments express the cooperation on net neutrality is necessary to, I’m quoting, create an enabling environment to promote the exchange of digital goods and service. So, moreover, during the amendment of the additional protocol of the Pacific Alliance, its trading instrument within the alliance, the following provisions were adopted. So, I’m going to quote here article 14.6 of the commercial protocol, which is part of the telecommunication chapters, which says that each party shall adopt or maintain measures to ensure compliance with net neutrality. So, while countries may have their own measures to achieve this objective, the common goal of net neutrality is committed at the regional level within the alliance. Next, please. I’m sorry for this slide and the following one. I know it has a lot of information. I think we can afterwards share the presentation. So, I’m just going to summarize this. We can see here that the four countries in the Pacific Alliance have implemented policies looking to ensure net neutrality. So, our research found that Chile was the first country to adopt these measures. To a large extent, the other three economies have replicated the Chilean model with small variations. What is most interesting here and relevant for our discussion today is the final column, because here we can see information on how these countries have addressed exceptionality during COVID-19 pandemic. So, it is concluded that while existing laws on net neutrality are imposed, there is policy space allowing countries to implement exceptionality measures to ensure that access to critical digital services, as education or health related, was possible during the pandemic. So, prioritization was possible under the event of the pandemic, supported by the World Health Organization, as happened also in Colombia. And we also see that traffic management measures for emergencies were also put in place. Also, for example, Mexico defined that this kind of exceptions could be grinded if there was a risk to the integrity and security of the net network or private communication of users, exceptional technology congestion, and also emergency and disaster situations. So, therefore, net neutrality principles was not incompatible with an emergency situation. Next, please. So, this analysis takes us to Asia-Pacific economies. So, while the use of net neutrality has been widely discussed for countries in the Asia-Pacific, most economies in this region have not yet implemented formal regulations regarding net neutrality. So, there are various reasons for this lack of regulation, being one common acknowledgement that the stakes are high for both consumers and industry holders, and states don’t want to lose the possibility of controlling traffic on the internet. Nevertheless, we can find some cases in India, Japan, and Singapore, for example, where these countries have already implemented in different extents net neutrality regulations, as you can see in this slide. So, as I mentioned before, I know I don’t have much time left, so I’m going to afterwards share this presentation. Next slide, please. Here, we can see the comparison between the three main integration processes. We have the Pacific Alliance, APEC, and ASEAN. So, as previously mentioned, a significant development at the level of binding instruments and working documents with a focus on the regional digital market, all of them addressing net neutrality, has been taking place in the Pacific Alliance. In the case of APEC, we can see that net neutrality has been highlighted in recent years in relevant working documents, which may eventually lead to a leader’s declaration, but still no further progress has been achieved. While in the case of ASEAN economies, there is no relevant advances to establish that the net neutrality principle is part of their agenda, pointing out the differences between member economies, too. Next, please. So, to wrap up from our research, it can be stated that members of the Pacific Alliance began with the incorporation of the net neutrality principle in the trade protocol of the Alliance. So, in turn, the adoption of the principle by the four countries, not only closing time, but also their connection points, have been highlighted in key issues to promote the digital economy and in the intra-regional trade as they intersect in subjects such as traffic management measures, transparency, compliance mechanism, and references to international technical standards. Regulation details regarding traffic management measures in a way that would allow the adoption of measures to prioritize traffic and data for essential services in time of emergency, such as the pandemic. So, in this regard, the four regulations stand out for the level of detail and for the instructions to which internal services providers must adhere, being able to manage data traffic in order to ensure the continuity of critical services. Members of the Pacific Alliance made progress in joint discussions that led to the reform of all telecom legislation and subsequently set the first multilateral precedent for the incorporation of net neutrality principles in an international treaty. So, the Alliance practices align with both members’ digital trade policies. Just a couple of more ideas before I finish. The regulation of net neutrality within Asia-Pacific economies has been a matter of divergence, and some countries have built regulations and frameworks to address this issue. In contrast, others have not worked on this topic, so while the topic has been covered in some preferential trade agreements such as CPTPP, it has not been covered in others such as, for example, RCEP. Next, please, just to conclude. Here, I think I’ve already mentioned everything related to COVID-19, so I’m going to focus on the last two points. So, we see that the Asia-Pacific region, particularly APEC and ASEAN, has discussed the concept of net neutrality at a multilateral level. However, the experiences in local regulations are still scarce, and many organizations or forums have focused more on the declarative sphere rather than actually developing and creating regulations. The Pacific Alliance has offered an unusual normative and political experience. It has difficultly developed its binding discussion and worked instruments on net neutrality, so I think that this dissemination of information can help us build best practices in the Asia-Pacific region. Thank you. Next, please. Thank you, Ignacio.

Ignacio Sánchez González:
So, thank you very much, Javier, for that excellent and clear presentation. Now, I give the floor to Olga Cavalli, who is the National Director of Cybersecurity in Argentina. Olga, thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you for inviting me. Very interesting

Olga Cavalli:
investigation and the outcomes of this initiative. I was wondering, Pacific Alliance, because I’m ignorant of how many countries do make part of the Pacific Alliance, if you can tell me. Chile, Colombia, Peru, Mexico. So, the one side that you have mentioned, Chile, Colombia, Peru, Mexico. Okay, very interesting that you gathered together to have a treaty, which I understand that it’s binding to national regulations, which is important because sometimes we get together and we do declarations which are perhaps aspirational, and then it doesn’t… I think it’s very important that we have this kind of discussion and we have to reflect what really has an impact at the national level. Argentina doesn’t have a specific regulation on net neutrality, although the national law on digital services, I would say, national digital, establishes two articles that guarantees the network neutrality for the services in place. I think it’s very important that we have this discussion and we have to reflect what really has an impact at the national level. I think there are a lot of philosophical questions about this issue of net neutrality. Sometimes I think it’s a bit aspirational and perhaps it’s difficult to think about it in a world where most of the traffic is increasing and really concentrating, especially in streaming services. If you look the way that the Internet traffic has been distributed, it’s not the same. It’s not the same as streaming services. It’s not the same as streaming services. It’s not the same as the delivery services. At the same time, you have the content delivery networks that deliver most of this content into directly to Internet exchange points. So at a point, trying to do regulations about network neutrality with a reality that most of the content is being distributed, it’s not the same as streaming services. So I think it’s just a question that I make myself. In any way, I’m putting a doubt in what you’re doing. Sometimes I wonder if it’s something aspirational and really we can achieve. At the same time, thinking about mobile services, the practice of, for example, in a package that you buy, you have a specific law that says that you can’t send messages to a particular country, but you can send messages to the bound of services like WhatsApp or some, not all messaging services like WhatsApp, but not every messaging. I wonder, that’s a common practice. I know that in some countries it was not allowed, like Chile, because you have a specific law on network neutrality. I wonder if it’s something that we should really struggle to achieve or just bear in mind that it exists. At the same time, I have a question for those who made the research. The inclusion of internet of things in the mobile networks, like, for example, 5G, will include a new way of treating the bandwidth of the network, which is called network slicing. Some people think that network slicing is a way of not respecting the network neutrality, because you are treating differently different types of traffic, but it makes sense in relation with the service. I mean, you cannot delay an autonomous car, the streaming of that car, because it may hit someone and do an accident, but you can delay a service. If you delay a service, it’s not a service. If you delay a service, it’s not a service. You can delay other traffic, I don’t know, perhaps streaming or music or broadcast of television or radio. So, then, some type of traffic in the networks that are being developed now, whether in 5G, or I also think about the internet of things, it’s a way of respecting the network neutrality. If you are thinking about objects that are connected, and they are providing critical services to users. So that’s a question for those who have made the research, and I congratulate you for what you have done. Thank you. Thank you very much, Olga, for your inputs. Now, I believe that you mentioned, for example, zero rating, and some technologies that are developing. I don’t know if Piero… Zero rating didn’t come to my mind, because I’m totally jet lagged. I was finding the words in my mind, and it didn’t come. Thank you for reminding me.

Ignacio Sánchez González:
I don’t know, Piero, if I’m speaking on behalf of you, but I think that Piero, who is our next speaker, might refer to zero rating. I’m not sure, Piero, if you are not going to, don’t worry. I’m not sure if you are going to, don’t worry. I’m not sure if you are going to, don’t worry. I’m not sure if you are going to. So, Piero, he works in the undersecretariat of international economic relations, and he will present a commentary and reflection on the Chilean experience, negotiating net neutrality within the Pacific alliance. Piero, thank you very much, because also, there’s a lot of time difference between here and the other side, and it’s a lot of time difference between the two sides. So, Piero, if I may ask you, I hope you can hear me?

Piero Guasta Leyton:
PIERO JARAMILLO-SANTOS Yes. PIERO JARAMILLO-SANTOS Everything is okay, technically? First of all, I would like to thank you, Javiera, and Felipe, for inviting me here. My first comment are in general that I think this effort is very good. For me, it’s very important. It’s key to start discussing this type of issues. And I think it’s very important to discuss this type of issues, because, particularly in the trade work, these type of topics are very high behind more more famous topics, so it’s always good to discuss this. Particularly because we are in a stage on trade that the civil society is asking why we negotiate, why we are working these topics. And I think that we need to start discussing this. And I think that we need to start kind of defending the technical aspect that are born with internet. For example, free data flows, net neutrality, et cetera. It’s not something that we need to implement in the future, but something that we need to protect, if you will, in trade agreements to continue that. And I think that we need to start talking about that, because we already have that, yes, that is true, but the idea behind this is to protect these issues. Regarding this specific topic, I will talk again, I’m sorry for repeating myself, about the trade perspective, and I will connect that with what Ignacio was saying in the sense that the view from trade is kind of, I don’t want to say that it’s a bad view, but it’s kind of a bad view, because it’s not the trade economy, but it’s the competition, the opportunity for companies to export. So in our view, for example, it discusses a lot the new measures that some countries took during the pandemic. In the case of trade, it’s kind of allowed, because specifically in the case of Chile, we follow the idea that we need to have a regulatory. So for example, during the pandemic, you can prioritize health services or any other service, but you cannot discriminate between different providers. Same idea with the streaming, same idea with email providers, same idea with all the areas of the internet economy. Okay? So in that sense, I think the current measure of all trade agreements allow that, because, again, our focus is non-discriminatory. The idea is to all have the opportunity to be able to enter the market. And that is very important, for example, in the case of the pandemic, there were some initiatives or platforms that, for example, Chile developed or Colombia developed, and the idea was to be able to offer that solutions to Pacific Alliance in the same conditions. So in our view, we don’t need specific measures for that. Because it’s already available, and that is the main idea on the main objective on trade perspective. Regarding the topic more in general, for us, it has been very useful. I remember some early studies from specifically from one of our ISPs talk that it was very useful to have this kind of policies, because you make the market more attractive, more competitors can enter the markets, and be able to reduce the prices and allow more data processes and services to be available. In the case of Chile, we are adopters of almost everything technological, and we have almost access to everything that is currently on the Internet. We have some particularities that, for example, Asian products that maybe took a little bit of a long time to enter other markets like Europe or the U.S. are very easily entered to Chile. So I think it has been a good practice from Chile. I know that Internet has been evolving. There is the old discussion about autonomous cars. I’m prioritizing that. The health issue. But I think we need to be more aware of the health issue. But I think we need to see how everything is evolving regarding, for example, streaming. There is a lot of work regarding the broadband they use. There is a lot of competition about algorithms that compress images. Probably it’s not broadband is not much important as the latency of the connection. So I think that is another point of discussion regarding specific health and autonomous driving. But again, I’m closing for not extending too much my discourse. I think it’s a very good paper. It’s good that we continue the discussion. I know that maybe we need to evolve this more because, again, it’s a technical issue that we kind of established on the agreement that was already there and we hopefully we are not going to change in the future. But it’s important to highlight that, to see that this is important that we negotiate on other topics in the future. So thank you to the authors. Please, if you have any other questions, feel free to ask it. Thank you.

Ignacio Sánchez González:
Thank you very much, Piero, for your inputs. Now I give the floor to Raquel Gattu, who is representing NIC.BR, NIC.BR. She will comment and reflect from the perspective of the technical community and speak about the situation in Brazil. Thank you very much, Raquel.

Raquel Gatto:
Thank you very much, Ignacio, Javiera, Felipe, for the study and for the invitation to be here commenting. I should start with a little bit of background. I’m a lawyer, so I’m supposed to be talking about technical issues and technical issues. So I will give a disclaimer. For the Latin American folks here in Japan, this is the worst time of the day. For all of us. So you’re all jet lagged a little bit more by the end of the afternoon because of the time zone. So forgive if some word is missing and if we do look a little sleepy here. But I will bring a little bit to my side in terms of commenting the regulation. And, in fact, in Brazil, net neutrality was and still is a big topic. It was interesting, and that’s what I want to bring forward with the questions Ignacio put in the beginning. Why it is important, right, and what has been done in each of the countries that we are talking today and in Brazil. So, as a Baril, when I say Barexcogenics, it maps Japan, it also maps the Brazil and Argentines. It also has a revision country also and Argentina and others. So for all of you that don’t know, Markus Review of Internet, the Brazilian Bill of Rights or the Internet framework, how we call it, and it was issued in 2014 after the Brazilian government passed a law that allows the use of Internet as a way to protect the rights of the user. So it’s a law, but it doesn’t go into the nitty-gritty details. And one of the perspectives of Markus Review is to bring the user’s rights protection before we go into the criminal penalties that comes with the problems that we know the Internet faces, but let’s protect the rights first. So the first challenge was to make sure that the Internet is protected. And the second challenge was to make sure that the Internet is protected before we go into the criminalization. And one of the big topics was net neutrality. The first challenge was to make the legislators understand what the Internet is and how it works into the technical perspective of open Internet working. And the third challenge was to make sure that the legislators understand how the Internet is and how it works into the technical perspective of open Internet working. And the fourth challenge was to make sure that the legislators can break this core, neutral core of the Internet, and that’s an interesting exercise that happened because Markus Review was discussed through public consultations, online consultations, and it was very, very interesting to see how people were able to have the click, you know, when they understand what are the consequences of their decisions in terms of regulations. And then, well, fast-forwarding, because we don’t have much time, the decision was to keep it as a principle of net neutrality, to the point Olga was making. Is it kind of aspirational? Is it kind of, you know, like, you know, like, you know, we have to keep it as a principle of net neutrality and we have to keep it as a principle of net neutrality. And then we go into the exceptions, and the study brings this forward very nicely in terms of, okay, so, that’s what we want. We want to keep it non-discriminatory. We want to have the packages flowing, whatever the content is, where they are coming from, where they are going to, and so on, and so on, and so on, and so on, and so on, and so on, and so on. And so, it begs for the questions, who is deciding what those exceptions are, and how are we going to control it or monitor it? I’m avoiding the word control, but it doesn’t come anything better in my mind. Anyway, and so, in the case of Brazil, Marcos Sevil has the principle of net neutrality, and it’s a very important principle, and it’s mentioned in the document, but then it mentions the possibility of exceptions in case of the need, for example, for a traffic trolling, I don’t know exactly how to spell that, and then to prioritize emergency-essential services. And then after two years, there was, oh, sorry, and then Marcos Sevil came out with the concept for the law to achieve the exception, but it’s also mentioned on the steps they’re going to define the rules that those exceptions are fit. So one of them is the Brazilian Internet community, where I work, so Nick is the arm of the CIG that is appointed there, and then it’s there, and then there’s the other, the other decree that sets out, lays out the implementation of those exceptions for net neutrality. For example, in case of that you have an overload with spam or with the DOS, the denial of services attacks. So in those cases, of course, you’re going to break, you know, and put rules in the middle, because you need to. So the Internet keeps working, and the network keeps doing what it needs to do. So anyway, those are the cases that there are already in the regulation, and that they’re being put in place. But then, and I’m fast forwarding, because this is the question that I have also for you guys, in terms of your studies, and perhaps you can expand or just tell if this is something you were looking for. in the future, but I think, as I said, after you take the principles and after you take, okay, you set out, those are the rules, then you need to think on the implementation and the monitoring. So how you are going to make sure that those exceptions are only exceptions and not become themselves the rules and how you are going to even prove that, because this is an issue, right? Even if you set out an oversight and ways to, and the regulation has some penalties for that, even there, how do you prove it? And so you go more into making it real than just aspirational. So I’m leaving like that and thank you very much. Thank you.

Ignacio Sánchez González:
Thank you very much, Raquel. Just to provide a quick answer and then give the floor to Dilmar. Yeah, exactly. Effectively, one of the elements that our research, our previous research considered, we identified seven elements of net neutrality regulations. And one of those elements are, of course, the exceptions, because you can have net neutrality regulations, but if you don’t have the exceptions, or what will the exceptions be? Actually, the legislation won’t be operable, no, it can’t be effective. And besides the exceptions, one of the other elements is the dispute settlement bodies when net neutrality is not taking place. But I do think this dispute settlement was an element because there you can go when net neutrality is not being complied on the part of the ISPs. But I do think that it is a challenge, the monitoring. I think all the legislation we saw, they lack of a body that actively monitors that everything and everyone are complying with the principle. I have that quick answer for now. So now I give the floor to Dilmar Villena, who is the Executive Director of the NGO Hiperderecho of Peru. Dilmar, thank you very much for being here.

Dilmar Villena Fernández Baca:
Thank you very much for the invitations and congratulations on the paper. Well, talking about net neutrality, right now it’s not the hot topic like is AI, but it’s always good to talk about it because it’s essential part of internet, net neutrality. And well, net neutrality as an ideal, as a principle, it’s also in our Peruvian regulation. But what happened during COVID-19 is like, yes, we have net neutrality, regulatory bodies implement net neutrality and demand companies to comply it. But pandemic starts and what we have in front is like, all the infrastructure isn’t ready for all the flow of information that it started at that point. Pandemic started and nobody could get out and everybody was using their laptops, their cell phones in order to work, in order to, I don’t know, to consume some entertainment. So that in Peru, that’s what happened. And I think that happened also in a lot of countries. And net were overloaded. So Peruvian government in that case, take, let operators to take some emergency actions in order to prioritize the flow of some packages to some specific types of website or services. Talking about server rating, for example, what happened in Peru. Peruvian government developed a webpage that is called Aprendo en Casa. Dot com, dot PE. And it was the center of information from all the students that couldn’t go to school, but in order to learn or in order to have access to some educational materials, they could get it through this page, Aprendo en Casa dot PE. And what happens in Peru that students that need to access to this information doesn’t have the data packages in their cell phones or doesn’t have the money required to buy these data packages. So in that case, most of the telecom companies, and also because of the Peruvian government ordered that, they put server rating to access to this educational webpage. And also Peruvian government, like it didn’t order, but it suggested the companies to prioritize some types of traffic to, I don’t know, traffic for people that are doing remote working or maybe people that are using Zoom or Microsoft Teams or all of these platforms to do their work while they stay at home. But during the time of the day, but what government didn’t take into account is when they did these regulations, they were talking more on the traditional form of working. But what happened with person that were making money through streaming services, like streamers, like were gamers and streamers, they couldn’t have the necessary package flow to continue doing some streaming and also working because for most of them, the video gamers, streamers, that was their work. So that was a point that also Peruvian government didn’t take into account when we were talking about net neutrality. Other thing that is very important is Peruvian legislations permits server rating when is it done in arbitrary form. So what is not arbitrary is not that clear, but in any case, it demands to telecom companies to be transparent about that. The transparency of companies in implementing this measure is a key concern here. How transparent have been telecom operators in Peru regarding network managing during the pandemic? One of the questions we ask whether these companies are adequately communicating their actions and decisions during this uncertain times, those are certain times of the pandemic. Among the major operators in Peru, just one at that time was complying with transparency demands on net neutrality. The other three ones didn’t comply with it. So we didn’t know to which platforms or to which websites telecom companies were treating or giving preference and treatment to their data packages. And that is what comes to my question maybe and what we can discuss about the paper. Through the Pacific Alliance, there is a lot, maybe there are two, three companies, big companies, telecom companies that are in our countries. Now I’m thinking about Peru, Chile, Mexico, maybe now Claro or Intel, I don’t know. Maybe we can think about how these companies comply with net neutrality requirements in each country and why do they comply more or less in each country. I don’t know. In the case of Peru, Intel, that is from Chile, is like seven or eight years in the Peruvian market. And actually, not much complies in net neutrality disposition, at least in transparency. But we have other telecom companies that do comply with, do comply it. So maybe we can think about it on the future. These are more the same companies, but why do they comply more or less in some countries when we talk about the Pacific Alliance? So that I think is gonna be for me. Thank you very much.

Ignacio Sánchez González:
Thank you, Dilmar. And now that I’m hearing you talking about transparency and you were talking about the user rights and their regulations, I am recalling the other elements of the net neutrality legislation that we started last year and actually transparency and the user protection, specifically privacy, are one of the elements of this net neutrality legislations besides dispute resolution also. Now, before closing, I know that Professor Cáceres who presented the paper wants to go deeper in one of the questions that were made in the panel.

Javiera Cáceres Bustamante:
Thank you, Ignacio. Well, thank you all the speakers. It was very interesting and I’m taking a few notes. I don’t know if I have so many question or ideas to answer all of your questions, but I think it’s been super interesting. Regarding to what Olga was saying before regarding network slicing, I think we did not consider that as part of our paper. I think that would be something very interesting to concerning future research or maybe like a revised version of our article. But I think here it’s interesting to see how kind of like both the literature or one like how states are actually approaching this topic. It’s very changing in the sense that when we talk about network slicing, like completely we could say right away, like, no, it’s not compatible with network neutrality. But if we start thinking about it, we see also that this also depends on the application and intent. So we see that network slicing is used more like to support specific technical requirements, for example, low latency for critical services like autonomous driving, for example. So we see that in that case, we can see network slicing as a way to optimizing network resources for safety and efficiency. And in that case, when we think about net neutrality, we can see that, yeah, in this case, actually the problem with net neutrality is when we’re talking about this preferential treatment for a specific ASP. So in that case, I think we go back to what Raquel was saying because actually how we monitor, how we regulate both net neutrality and network slicing will be very important to see how actually net neutrality or network slicing is being used so that it doesn’t actually become a backdoor violation of net neutrality. So I think that’s something very interesting to consider. And also moving forward to what Mr. Dillmar was saying about this idea of how to comply with net neutrality. I think that’s also something that wasn’t as part of our paper in the sense of following, maybe go like a different analysis, even like mythologically speaking of going, talking to companies and actually comparing how they’re actually complying with net neutrality. But I think that’s also very interesting to consider in future research. So thank you very much for all your comments. Thank you, Ignacio.

Ignacio Sánchez González:
Yes, thank you, Javiera. Also recalling who decides the exceptions, for example, I was remembering that when we started the Colombian regulation in the decree, they say, okay, the net neutrality principle is established, but the traffic management, they can manage traffic while the ISPs comply with the ITU recommendation and they specify a specific recommendation. So if they comply with that, traffic management can be done. So that’s one of the ways that they rationalize the exceptions regarding the principle. Something else that I recalled on that previous research. I don’t know if anyone else has a comment or a question. Please.

Felipe Muñoz Navia:
Hello. Well, thanks for all the, for the panel, the authors of the paper. Very interesting discussion. I wanted to comment on what Olga said. Most of the network slicing with 5G is something new that’s going to stick eventually. We’ll have three types of slices. The one that most of us will use for sure would be enhanced mobile broadband. But there will also be using the same physical layer. That’s a nice thing of slicing is that you will be able to have different logical networks in the same hardware. So you will have massive machine type communication for IoT for having millions of devices and also for the, I would say very few cases at least at the beginning with ultra reliable low latency. To me, because what I’ve seen, I’m not an expert, I’m not a lawyer, I’m an engineer, and this has to do also with what Raquel pointed out, the exceptions. The law says the principles that should guide us, we don’t want arbitrary discrimination of the scheduler, of the way we traffic packages. But there’s also the same law usually says, okay, but this is going to be defined in a technical draft. That’s where the details go. And it’s interesting what Olga mentioned because I don’t see any technical draft today that speaks about discriminating not in the routing layer, in layer three, where usually we are all watching if there’s neutrality or not, but underneath it. So that’s something for sure we have to analyze and see what’s going on there because that’s where net neutrality, although in the routing is being respected, maybe underneath it is not. So that’s something for sure that it has to be updated in all the technical drafts that go with the laws in our countries. So thanks a lot, very interesting topic, thanks.

Olga Cavalli:
Sorry, that the regulation includes exceptions that enables good services for consumers and for services providers. But you must have all these things that will happen or are happening right now. So because the environment will change very much from what it was before, especially considering the amount of Internet of Things devices that will be connected, which is the number is really enormous and it’s happening now. So the idea is that the regulation is good for everyone and it’s not prohibiting things that are good, but consider them exceptions or part of, or modify or more broad. That’s very challenging with any, no me salen las palabras, pero estoy dormida. So with all the regulations that are related with technology it’s very challenging because you have to be ample, you have to be let updates and the changes in the services. So it’s a process.

Ignacio Sánchez González:
Yes, indeed. That’s why there’s a common phrase, at least in Chile, that says the law always comes late and especially regarding technologies. So of course there is a challenge there. So thank you also for your input and the comments. Now I think we might be closing. We are on time. I want to thank all the speakers online and onsite for bringing the perspective of Latin America to the IDF of this year. So thank you very much. Really all of you online and onsite. Thank you for also the people who attended our session. Thank you for the participation. Thank you.

Javiera Cáceres Bustamante:
Thank you, Ignacio, for all convening us today.

Audience:
Thank you. Gracias, Javier. Nos vemos. Ciao. Nos vemos. Bye-bye. Yeah, I don’t know. I think she has drafts. I think she has drafts. Yo solamente los traje para traer conversacion. Yo creo que… No, no, no. Creo que… Creo que…