Op-Ed: Starlink, Disruption, and the Future of Internet Regulation in Kenya

If the goal of every business is to attract and retain an audience with whom you exchange value for some form of profit, then fundamentally every business is by nature a media company. Meaning that every business must have the means to communicate en masse, producing and distributing content to a target audience through various channels.

So the entry of Starlink in Kenya should be of interest to every business. This is true not only for service companies, but also for companies that produce physical goods if one considers that the goods you sell – yes even toothpicks, are hired by your customer to perform a service.

Consumption and use are 2 different things. I use internet to consume online content and digital services. To split hairs, I value the online content more than the internet access. Akin to energy, the energy that has been subjected to human-made transformation (secondary energy) e.g. electricity, heat, etc., is more valuable per kilojoule than the primary energy e.g. solar, fossil fuels and nuclear, that are used to create the secondary energy.

So should Starlink be regulated? Should Starlink be required to pay license fees to offer internet access in Kenya? Should Starlink be required to offer their service through existing operators or should their technology be accessible to consumers directly. 

A WhatsApp group that I am in, had a heated exchange on this matter last week, with some posts generating more heat than light on the matter. Some of the arguments were worth more than the energy expended and the data bundles consumed. I particularly like the argument that we’re all in a social contract – whether we like it or not, we live in each others’ good graces.

That is to say that the primary purpose of establishing licensing authorities is to align the venture for profit by any private actor with the benefits to the society within which the profiteer operates in. That is not to say that licensing authorities are needed in every domain, nor to say that they must react to every innovation in their domain. If the society grants grace (adoption) to a new actor when alternatives exist, the licensing authority is wiser not to move with haste.

A relevant case that was cited on one of the posts was the licensing regime that issued permits for the termination of international calls. Gen Z please wait outside on this one. This was our struggle then before VOIP, which we now readily apply to consume via Skype, WhatsApp, Telegram, Zoom, Teams, Google Meet etc.

Should Google be barred/restricted from enabling the placing of calls to your friends and family in another country? I would say the society already granted Google Meet et al that grace. The VOIP technology challenged the licensing principles and made licensing ineffective even if it were attempted.

Back to Starlink. What then are the possible responses by our society (Kenya) to the entry of low-orbiting satellites that transmit high-speed broadband internet? Let’s keep in mind that Starlink today is the progenitor of this technology, but many me-toos and improvements will surely come along as is the order with new innovations that have have been granted grace by early adopters. The Chinese already have their alternative – 1,000 Sails, and have reportedly cast ~15,000 of these to the orbit, compared to Space X’s ~5,000. I would make a case for the following;

• Introduce a fee for every satellite orbiting over the Kenyan orbital space for the purpose of transmitting internet. Such fee should be designated to a purpose that serves the society like internet access for public schools. I observe with concern the disparity being created in our society on account of internet access. Kids in the same generation are being prepared very differently for an increasingly connected world. And formal/school-based education will not forever hold the title the great equalizer. Internet access will take that title. The CA does have a proviso for effecting this by way of the Universal Service Fund.
• Introduce a block-chain based mechanism for generating and sharing revenue with content creators, whenever digital content is accessed via such technology. A content creator will elect whether to publish their content online for a fee and encode it with a cryptographic key that requires proof of payment before it is enjoyed. Again, Kenya’s legal framework provides for the licensing of Electronic Certification Service Providers (E-CSPs), that can establish the mechanisms for monetisation of digital content. Guys like DSTV may consider this as an alternative distribution model in the same manner that Apple with iTunes killed the CD market. It is not necessary to pay for a full bouquet of DSTV if I am only interested in the EPL, or more being more refined, specifically Arsenal games on the EPL.

Internet access needs to be regarded as a utility that I assert will someday make it to the Bill of Rights. The internet is the most efficient means of access to almost anything and specifically knowledge and audiences. Digital financial service operators will play an important role in bridging this reality by building the financial infrastructure for the discovery and exchange of value on the internet. I am excited to be in the industry at such time and to have the opportunity to build the financial infrastructure for the internet commerce.

Let there be internet to all. Why wait?

Written by Eric Muriuki, CEO of LOOP DFS.