ITV

Category: High Court

  • CBFC has powers to issue multiple certificates on various versions of films

    CBFC has powers to issue multiple certificates on various versions of films

    NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court has been informed that the Central Board of Film Certification can issue multiple “certifications” with respect to various versions of a film. 

     

    In its affidavit filed before a bench of Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice R S Endlaw, the Information and Broadcasting Ministry said the certificate is issued on the content as and when it is changed while being shown on TV channels. 

    The submission was in reply to a public interest litigation opposing issuance of universal certificates to an adult movie after deletion of some contents. The petition was also against the practice of conversion of ‘A’ films into ‘U/A’ and ‘U’ to enable their telecast on TV channels. 

    “Provision of the Cinematograph Act and Rules clearly provide for multiple certifications being issued with respect to various versions of one particular film.

     

    “Under the Cinematograph Act, the certification is done of the content and when there is change in content, recertification is required and is done,” the Ministry said. 

    The CBFC “has absolute power to certify films and it is also a competent authority to entertain applications seeking certificate of films which are altered by way of deletion/addition of certain scenes/dialogues.” 

    The plea was filed by Edara Gopi Chand, vice-president, Media Watch-India through advocate Gaurav Kumar Bansal. 

    The petitioner said children and adolescents are exposed to ‘adult’ film material like drug use, adultery, extramarital affairs, ribald comedy, intimate scenes of romance and sexuality, ‘item songs’ with vulgar lyrics and dance sequences, scenes involving rape and other heinous acts against women, films with extreme violence, films of horror and thriller genres etc. 

     

    “The adverse impact of such content on the impressionable minds of children and adolescents is well-established by various research studies at national and international levels. By such exposure, the due right of minors to be protected from harmful/age-inappropriate media content is being violated,” the plea said. 

  • PHD Chamber to join hands with I&B Ministry to launch campaign about piracy

    PHD Chamber to join hands with I&B Ministry to launch campaign about piracy

    NEW DELHI: Information and Broadcasting Minister Prakash Javadekar today welcomed the initiative taken by the PHD Chamber of Commerce and Industry to launch a joint campaign to create awareness about video and software piracy.

     

    The Minister was responding to an offer by the Chamber whose Media and Entertainment Committee members met today.

     

    While they thanked the Minister for removing service tax from television advertising, they said the music and film industry was facing a major problem because of illegal piracy.

     

    The delegation offered its services for an awareness campaign in this regard among general public through conferences, awareness campaigns and painting competitions among school children.

     

    The delegation was led by Chamber president Sharad Jaipuria with vice presidents Alok Sri Ram  and Media and Entertainment Committee chairman Mukesh Gupta, ED Saurabh Sanyal and senior secretary Yogesh Srivastava.

  • Delhi HC adjourns Kantar case till 26 August

    Delhi HC adjourns Kantar case till 26 August

    NEW DELHI: The Delhi High court today adjourned till 26 August the hearing in the matter relating to Kantar Media Research with regard to cross holding in TAM. 

     

    The adjournment came after justice Manmohan was informed that the new government had not appointed the advocate who would argue on behalf of the government.

     

    TAM can continue publishing its TV ratings till the court decides on the Kantar petition.

     

    The matter arose after the Information and Broadcasting Ministry directed all rating agencies to get themselves registered with the government and laid down conditions which barred cross holding.

     

     Kantar Media Research challenged the government regulation in view of the cross holding provision.

  • 219 private websites blocked for showing FIFA, Google does not figure in list

    219 private websites blocked for showing FIFA, Google does not figure in list

    NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court has been informed by telecom player Airtel that it has already blocked 219 websites which were illegally streaming live the matches of 2014 FIFA World Cup.

     

    The Court had earlier on 23 June issued an injunction restraining over 400 private websites from showing the matches, following a petition by Multi Screen Media (Sony) that holds the exclusive rights for beaming the matches in India.

     

    Interestingly, the list given by Airtel does not list any Google website despite the fact that the Court had specifically cited two Google sites.

     

    The vacation bench of Justice V Kameswar Rao gave a directive to the Department of Information Technology and Telecom to ensure implementation of the order of the court. He also said that his directive would be forwarded to the concerned Ministry.

     

    The judge, who listed the matter to come up in the last week of July, gave the directive after hearing Saikrishna Rajagopal who was arguing on behalf of MSM.

     

    The sports arm of MSM, Sony Six is the official broadcaster of the football extravaganza, while its digital platform LIVSports.in has the exclusive rights to live stream the event.
     
    The network had moved the court after it found out that several unauthorised websites were streaming the World Cup matches illegally.

     

    MSM had said that it has the official rights to telecast matches in six channels in the Indian sub-continent, including Sony Six and offers live streaming on Sony Liv and Liv Sports (for mobile).

     

    The court order was revised on 1 July and the list of sites was modified after a list was submitted again by MSM. The High Court had also directed that the copy of the order must be sent to DoT and DIT, so that the Internet Service Providers can block the websites.

  • Celebrities should not endorse junk food say government guidelines

    Celebrities should not endorse junk food say government guidelines

    NEW DELHI: The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) has called for strict control on promotions and advertisements that are designed and targeted to children and adolescents across all media.

     

    In guidelines prepared recently with regard to junk food, the FSSAI has also made strong recommendations against celebrity endorsement of such foods.

     

    Consequently, Chief Justice Gorla Rohini and Justice Pradeep Nandrajog in the Delhi High Court have asked amicus curiae N K Kaul to file a detailed response within three weeks segregating what out of the submitted guidelines is enforceable and what is suggestive. The court also stressed on the need to specify the junk food items that should be regulated in schools. The court has now fixed the matter for 6 August.

     

    Criticising the Guidelines which it claims have been ‘diluted’ at the instance of the food industry, the Centre for Science and Environment has said that the a provision put initially in the Guidelines that establishes the need for mandatory self regulation of advertisements has been removed.

     

    Uday Foundation, a Delhi-based non-profit NGO filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in 2010 seeking a ban on junk food sold in schools and around them, regulation of junk food promotion and advertisement, and development of a school canteen policy. In response to this, the court had asked the FSSAI to set guidelines, which were framed recently. The FSSAI submitted these guidelines to the court for “making available quality and safe foods in schools”.

     

    The guidelines were developed by an expert group set up by the FSSAI following directions of the court in September 2013.

  • Delhi HC rejects Naveen Jindal’s plea to restrain Zee News from airing coverage about him

    Delhi HC rejects Naveen Jindal’s plea to restrain Zee News from airing coverage about him

    NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court today refused to grant MP and industrialist Naveen Jindal’s plea for a blanket order restraining Zee Media channels from airing news reports which he alleged were defamatory in the content.

     

     The Court however directed Zee News to obtain and air the views of Jindal and/or his companies while televising any programme pertaining to them.

     

    The Court said that Jindal and his company Jindal Steel and Power Limited (JSPL) had not been able to satisfy that they had got a prima facie good case and disposed of their plea.

     

    The Court acknowledged and upheld the right of news channels observing that Zee Media news channels are free to air news reports pertaining to the Congress MP or his companies during the 16th Lok Sabha Election in accordance with the guidelines laid down by the News Broadcasting Standards Authority (NBSA).

     

     Jindal had filed a case against Zee Media Corporation alleging defamation and seeking injunction against Zee News from publishing / airing or telecasting on its channels or website any news report which may be vindictive or defamatory to his reputation or that may be relating to his election campaign. The Court, after hearing the parties, declined the injunction as sought by Jindal.

     

     The Court held that when Jindal, holder of a public office and aspiring to become a member of an elected body is amidst the din of electioneering, all kinds of accusations and counter accusations are bound to flash thick and fast in all directions of which a person must not complain unless and until the allegations against him are per se defamatory.

     

     The Court has come to the conclusion that Jindal is not entitled for any injunction and the televised reporting by Zee News are not defamatory. After going through each and every allegations and comments made by Zee News channel in its news reports pertaining to Jindal, the Court held that the same cannot be said to be defamatory.

     

     The Court has further held that to restrain the defendant – Zee News – from pre-telecasting the programme or the news article or the reporting at this stage would not only be a gagging right to freedom of press but also gagging of the public to know about a candidate who is sought to be elected by the electorate.

  • Hearing on Kantar petition adjourned till 11 July

    Hearing on Kantar petition adjourned till 11 July

    MUMBAI: The Delhi High Court today adjourned hearing on a petition by Kantar Market Research Services challenging the government’s cross-shareholding norm for television rating agencies till 11 July.

     

    The court had earlier stayed operation of the cross-shareholding norm till the case is disposed of. And in accordance with the court’s directive, TAM Media Research, which is jointly owned by Kantar and Nielsen, last month applied to the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting for its registration as a television ratings service.

     

    The cross-shareholding norm, which came into effect from 15 February, debars shareholders owning more than 10 per cent of a television rating agency from having stakes in broadcasters and advertising agencies.

     

    TAM has also been allowed to continue publishing its television ratings till the court decides on the Kantar petition.

     

    Kantar had today sought adjournment of the case to April but the court decided to have the next hearing only in July.

     

    The election commission on Wednesday announced the dates for the 9-phase polling for Lok Sabha elections and the results would be announced on May 16.

     

    With the announcement of the election schedule, the election code of conduct came into effect which bars governments from taking any policy decisions.

  • Kantar gets stay on cross-shareholding norms; TAM can continue publishing viewership ratings

    Kantar gets stay on cross-shareholding norms; TAM can continue publishing viewership ratings

    NEW DELHI: While declining to stay Policy Guidelines for Television Rating Agencies in India, the Delhi High Court today directed that the sections relating to cross-holding will not come into force till the conclusion of the petition by Kantar Market Research Services, a shareholder of TAM Media Research, the only television viewership rating agency in India.

     

    Fixing the next date of hearing for 6 March, Justice Manmohan also stayed sections 16.1 and 16.2 of the Guidelines, thus giving freedom to TAM to continue offering its ratings to its clients.

     

    Taking note of the undertaking by Mr Mukul Rohatgi, senior counsel for Kantar, the Court said TAM would get another two weeks to get registered as required by the Policy Guidelines.

    The Court also took note of the undertaking by Rohatgi that the full list of companies that are associated with TAM and their clients will be placed on the website within two weeks.

     

    The sections relating to cross-holding which state that the same company cannot hold shares in both TRP companies and the media are 1.7a and 1.7d.

     

    The earlier deadline for TAM Media Research to get registered under the Policy Guidelines was 15 February.

     

    When Rohatgi insisted on a stay of the policy guidelines till conclusion of this case, Justice Manmohan and Additional Solicitor General Rajeev Mehra said senior counsel Harish Salve who had argued on behalf of Kantar yesterday had made it clear that he was only fighting the issue of cross-shareholding. In fact, Justice Manmohan said Salve repeated this point at least five times.

     

    Rohatgi had sought to reiterate the point made by Salve that the policy guidelines had been issued through an executive action without any statutory authority of law.

     

    While Rohatgi filed an affidavit today listing companies that have a holding in Kantar, he assured the Judge that the list of clients would also be place shortly on the website and filed in the court.

     

    In his order, the Judge took note of the fact that both Salve and Rohatgi have argued that the guidelines are without the sanction of any statutory body.

    Kantar had argued yesterday that any action relating to fundamental rights had to be done through an act of Parliament and not by an executive order.

    Salve had said any attempt to regulate television rating agencies was tantamount to interfering with the freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a).

     

    The provisions of Policy Guidelines for Television Rating Agencies in India that have been stayed are:
     
    1.7 The company shall comply with the following cross holdings requirements.
     
     (a) No single company/ legal entity, either directly or through its associates or inter-connected undertakings, shall have substantial equity holding in rating agencies and broadcasters/advertisers/ advertising agencies.
     
     (d) A promoter company/member of the board of directors of the rating agency cannot have stakes in any broadcaster/ advertiser/advertising agency either directly or through its associates or inter-connected undertakings.
     
    16. PROVISIONS WITH RESPECT TO EXISTING RATING AGENCIES
     
    16.1 These guidelines shall also be applicable to the existing rating agencies.
     
    16.2 No rating agency shall generate and publish ratings till such time that they comply with the provisions of these guidelines.

  • Kantar gets stay on cross-shareholding norms; TAM allowed to publish ratings

    Kantar gets stay on cross-shareholding norms; TAM allowed to publish ratings

    NEW DELHI:  Kantar Market Research Services has managed to get the relief it wanted from the Delhi High Court on the cross-shareholding norms for television rating agencies.

     

    On a petition by Kantar challenging the government’s cross-shareholding norms for TV ratings agencies, the HC has stayed the operation of four sections — 1.7a, 1.7d, 16.1 and 16.2 — that relate to cross-shareholdings and to publishing of TV viewership ratings  in the Policy Guidelines for Television Rating Agencies in India.

     

    Kantar had filed the petition as the new policy would have resulted in TAM Media Research, a company it has jointly promoted with Nielsen India, having to shut operations.

     

    The court has given TAM two weeks to register itself under all the other provisions of the policy that was recently approved by the Cabinet Committee of Economic Affairs and comes into effect from 15 February.

     

    In addition, the court has also stayed the operation of a clause that prevents existing TV rating agencies from publishing viewership ratings till they company with the provisions of the policy. TAM is the only company in India providing TV viewership ratings.

     

    The Delhi High Court will hear further arguments in the case on 6 March.

     

    Meanwhile, TAM has been ordered to place on its website the list of its shareholders and also the list of its clients.

     

    The provisions of Policy Guidelines for Television Rating Agencies in India that have been stayed are:

     

    1.7 The company shall comply with the following cross holdings requirements.

     

     (a) No single company/ legal entity, either directly or through its associates or inter-connected undertakings, shall have substantial equity holding in rating agencies and broadcasters/advertisers/ advertising agencies.

     

     (d) A promoter company/member of the board of directors of the rating agency cannot have stakes in any broadcaster/ advertiser/advertising agency either directly or through its associates or inter-connected undertakings.

     

    16. PROVISIONS WITH RESPECT TO EXISTING RATING AGENCIES

     

    16.1 These guidelines shall also be applicable to the existing rating agencies.

     

    16.2 No rating agency shall generate and publish ratings till such time that they comply with the provisions of these guidelines.

     

    Click here for the updated story

  • Kantar argues TV ratings regulation requires legislative action

    Kantar argues TV ratings regulation requires legislative action

    NEW DELHI: Kantar Market Research Services, a promoter of India’s only television ratings agency TAM Media Research, said today that any action relating to fundamental rights had to be done through an act of Parliament and not by an executive order.

     

    Harish Salve, counsel for Kantar, said during the hearing on his client’s petition in the Delhi High Court against regulations for television ratings agencies that the government should have issued an ordinance and then replaced it with an act of Parliament since any attempt to regulate television ratings agencies was tantamount to interfering with the freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a). Any order curtailing fundamental rights must have statutory backing, he claimed.

     

    He said even the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India which had earlier given a report on TV ratings in 2008 and the Parliamentary Standing Committee which had considered the issue later in the same year had been of the view that the government could not tamper with the content. In any case, Salve argued that TRAI was only concerned with carriage and not content and can only make recommendations.

     

    He wondered why the Government did not act after it received the TRAI report in 2008 to push through legislation on this issue.

     

    He said the executive order under Article 73 was part of the government’s agenda to push for control of content.
     

    He said there will be a complete blackout of television viewership ratings under new government regulations since the Broadcast Audience Research Council (BARC) was still in the planning stage.
     

    He also said that the law was in any case clear that the government was a licensor for broadcasting and not TAM which was a private rating agency. As a private agency, it could not be told not to have cross-media holding.
     

    While still not granting a stay on the regulations that come into effect from 15 February, Justice Manmohan said he will continue hearing the case tomorrow but may consider ‘interim arrangements’ if the hearing lingers on.

     

    The Judge also asked Kantar to place on its website the shareholding pattern of various shareholders in TAM since the primary objection taken by Kantar is to the reference to cross-media holding in the proposed regulations.  

     

    The three respondents Union of India, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) and the News Broadcasters Association (NBA) have filed their affidavits and will present their views tomorrow on Kantar’s petition for an interim stay. 

     

    Salve, who concluded his arguments today, said Kantar did not have any cross-holding in the broadcasting sector. He claimed that TAM was operational in 37 countries.
     

    Senior counsel Mukul Rohatgi, who also represented Kantar, said the committee that recommended BARC had itself admitted that TAM was the best rating agency in the country, and had not made any recommendations with regard to cross-media holdings.

     

    During the last hearing, the judge had wanted to know why TAM was not present itself, and Salve said that the issue of cross-media holdings mentioned in the guidelines affected Kantar which was a major shareholder and not TAM.