A service called Free Basics, Indian regulators prohibited one of the principals of the effort, because it provided access simply to specific pre-authorized services – including Facebook – rather than the entire Internet.

That leaves the social networking mogul at a crossroads. Zuckerberg has not said whether he will change his strategy though he’s vowed not to give up.

To attain that aim, Zuckerberg has high flying dreams for someday supplying Internet connections through a network of lasers, satellites and drones. But his close-term plan is not more complex: Facebook works with wireless carriers in poorer countries to let individuals use streamlined variants of specific other online services and Facebook, without paying data costs.

Free Basics is meant for those who live in places with Internet service but can not afford it, while the drones may join individuals in places too distant for cables or cell towers.

A low income resident of Manila that is urban, for instance, can use Free Basics to look at the Philippines’ GMA News website. “He can be told. He is able to study.

The plan changes by state, in effectiveness and offerings.

In South Africa, with the third-biggest wireless carrier, Cell C., Facebook partnered for example

“Cell C is considerably more economical as far as everything else is worried, but their free Facebook isn’t a reality,” she said.

Last autumn, Facebook declared a major growth in Africa, where Bharti Airtel, another regional provider, said it’ll offer Free Basics in 17 states.

Technology competitors Microsoft and Google also have applications to expand Internet access, he noted, but their tactics are call for expanding networks to underserved regions and content neutral.

Facebook does not pay wireless businesses for the price of Free Basics. Providers make money if new users go to an information strategy that is paid. Facebook also says though Zuckerberg has granted it gains from getting users in the long run it makes no cash, as it does not reveal advertising.

Any user who did not have Internet access before, regardless of whether they are now active is counted by that.

That is the combined people of areas where it is accessible, not the variety of users.

Free Basics is in 36 states. It was frozen on the anniversary of anti-government demonstrations which were arranged partially on Facebook, in Egypt. After authorities said Internet providers could not offer reductions for getting some content but not others, an earlier variant of Free Basics, called Facebook Zero, was shuttered three years ago in Chile.

India turned into the largest battleground of the application.

Free Basics registered more than ONE million Indians in its first year, based on Reliance Communications, Facebook’s wireless associate. But critics, including many in the growing technology community in the country’s, whined it was a predatory scheme: If low income users could not manage anything besides Free Basics, adversaries said, that meant Facebook was determining which online services the country’s poor could use.

“The authorities must not let large players to monopolize the Web,” said Manu Sharma, who runs a software development firm in New Delhi.

Facebook reacted last autumn by declaring it’d start Free Basics to any program that matched with its technical demands for systems with small capacity. Zuckerberg also switched the software’s name to Free Basics, after critics whined “Internet.org” seemed like a not-for-profit, when it is part of a for profit business (the entire effort continues to be called Internet.org).

But rivals still stress that demands could alter at any given time, force rivals to pay higher rates to enter the software, or block services which run afoul of powerful politicians.

“The proven fact that it may make a decision as to what programs may be hosted … was a tremendous issue for me,” said Basit Zaidi, a New Delhi lawyer.

As Indian regulators started examining the problem, Facebook attracted on more bitterness with a public relations blitz that critics called heavy handed and patronizing. After reasoning Internet providers should not be permitted to charge different rates for specific services, because that discriminates against other content the regulators essentially prohibited Free Basics.

They are now examining whether “zero rating” applications, which offer some content free of charge, ought to be permitted. Net neutrality assistants are expecting other states will be influenced by India’s choice.

Facebook has also established a plan which helps Internet providers offer trusted Wifi service in underserved areas at reasonable rates and without limits on content. The plan’s been restricted to evaluations in several states.

The giant technology firm could use its resources and pull with providers to provide a wireless service that was similar, possibly at volume or small speeds, but with no limitations on content, said Josh Levy of Access Now, a non-profit that supports net neutrality. Zuckerberg has indicated previously that such a service would be hard and overly pricey to provide.

Some Indians say their nation might have profited from Free Basics.

“If someone is starving and getting nothing, a free meal is great enough.”