ITV

Category: Regulators

  • FCC commissioner Tom Wheeler proposes universal TV set-top-box

    FCC commissioner Tom Wheeler proposes universal TV set-top-box

    MUMBAI: In an attempt to overhaul the rules for television, tear down anti-competitive barriers and pave the way for software, devices and other innovative solutions to compete with set-top boxes (STBs), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has proposed universal STBs for television, which would allow consumers to view traditional cable and streaming video content on television.

     

    Wheeler is targeting a vote on 18 February by the five-member FCC on a proposal to overhaul the rules for STBs, which connect to cable, satellite and fiberoptic video systems.

     

    The proposed regulation would let customers get video services from providers instead of cable, satellite and other television providers.

     

    “Ninety-nine per cent of pay-TV subscribers are chained to their set-top boxes because cable and satellite operators have locked up the market,” the FCC said.

     

    According to the FCC, Americans spent $20 billion a year to lease pay-TV boxes, or an average of $231 a year. STB rental fees have jumped 185 per cent since 1994, while the cost of TVs, computers and mobile phones have dropped by 90 per cent.

     

    Recognising the importance of a competitive marketplace, the Congress directed the Commission to adopt rules that will ensure consumers will be able to use the device they prefer for accessing programming they’ve paid for.

     

    The FCC said that the only change it was proposing was to allow consumers alternative means of accessing the content they pay for.

     

    Wheeler’s proposal will create a framework for providing innovators, device manufacturers and app developers the information they need to develop new technologies. Consumers should be able to choose how they access the Multichannel Video Programming Distributor’s (MVPDs) – cable, satellite or telco companies – video services to which they subscribe.

     

    “A competitive marketplace is required by a 1996 law. Set-top boxes should be open to pay-TV rivals using formats that conform to specifications set by an independent, open standards body,” the FCC said.

     

    The proposal will help promote interoperability and remove barriers to innovation, prevent theft and misuse, lift up independent and minority programming content, honour the sanctity of contracts by providing copyright protection,  provide consumer protection by offering emergency alerts, privacy and advertising restrictions.

     

    It will also offer consumers more choice, greater flexibility, increased innovation, more competition and better prices.

     

    While the proposal has been welcomed by some, others have pooh-poohed it.

     

    “The promising slate of reforms proposed by (the chairman) could potentially allow consumers greater access to the content that they pay for, granting greater control over when, where, and how they want to access it, on the device they choose, without being locked into constant, unnecessary fees and excruciating installation and repair appointments,” said National Hispanic Media Coalition vice president of policy Michael Scurato.

     

    RLJ Entertainment chairman and Black Entertainment Television chairman Robert L. Johnson also came out in support of FCC’s proposal.

     

    Johnson said, “In my opinion, this is the best decision that the FCC has made to increase minority diversity in media content distribution since the Commission championed the tax certificate, which allowed for the increase in minority ownership of media properties. I am also very pleased that after speaking with several Members of the Congressional Black Caucus, the Caucus has agreed to a meeting to hear my position on this matter.”

     

    “If you have a good program idea, some financing and access to the Internet, you can find your audience. But your audience can only find you if they have a modem or a set-top box or software that lets them know you are there and gives them access to your programs unconstrained by the network gatekeeper,” he added.

     

    However, a coalition of pay-TV provider called Future of TV Coalition comprising the National Cable & Telecommunications Association, American Cable Association, Motion Picture Association of America and others, which has been formed to oppose the ‘AllVid’ proposal, said the proposed regulation will not provide new programming to customers or lower their television bills.

     

    In a statement, the Future of TV Coalition said, “The FCC proposal, as best anyone can understand it, still strips out all the tools that are used to honour license agreements, would increase consumer costs by mandating yet a second box inside the home and thus ignores the trends away from in-home boxes and devices, eliminates security protections and provides no reassurance on privacy rights.”

     

    TV One CEO Alfred Liggins and Future of TV Coalition co-chair added, “The ‘AllVid’ proposal is a brazen money grab by the Big Tech companies that would do severe damage to the programming ecosystem, and in particular, niche and minority-focused networks.”

  • TRAI recommends high reserve prices for spectrum auction; TSPs unhappy

    TRAI recommends high reserve prices for spectrum auction; TSPs unhappy

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) today recommended rates for auction of spectrum in the 700 Mhz, 800 Mhz, 900 Mhz, 1800 Mhz, 2100 Mhz, 2300 Mhz and 2500 Mhz bands.

     

    Earlier, TRAI chairman R S Sharma had said that the auction may be conducted in May or June this year.

     

    The base spectrum price per MHz for Delhi metro will be Rs 1,595 crore for 700 MHz, Rs 848 crore for 800 MHz, Rs 399 crore for 1800 MHz, Rs 554 crore for 2100 MHz, Rs 143 crore for 2300 MHz and Rs 143 crore for 2500 MHz band.

     

    TRAI said the base spectrum price per MHz for Karnataka (including Bangalore) will be Rs 740 crore for 700 MHz, Rs 303 crore for 800 MHz, Rs 558 crore for 900 MHz, Rs 185 crore for 1800 MHz, Rs 328 crore for 2100 MHz, Rs 98 crore for 2300 MHz and Rs 98 crore for 2500 MHz band.

     

    One TSP, who did not want to be named, told Indiantelevision.com that the prices were prohibitive and the government may be asked to reconsider the recommendations.

     

    The Authority reiterated its earlier recommendation that APT700 band plan should be adopted for the 700 MHz (698-806 MHz) spectrum band with FDD based 2×45 MHz frequency arrangement.

     

    TRAI has also recommended that entire available spectrum (2x35MHz) in the 700 MHz band should be put to auction in the upcoming auction.

     

    The Authority said test schedule for the roll-out obligations testing for 700 MHz should be released within a period of one year from the date of completion of auction in this band.

     

    The same roll-out obligations, which were imposed on the successful bidder of spectrum in 800 MHz, 900 MHz, 1800 and 2100 MHz band in the auctions held in 2015, should be prescribed for these spectrum bands in the upcoming auctions for new entrants. The Authority also said no fresh roll-out obligation should be imposed on existing service providers who are already operating their services in 800, 900, 1800 or 2100 MHz band, in case they acquire additional block of spectrum in the same band.

     

    The Authority recommended that the same eligibility criteria that have been made applicable for other bands viz. 800 MHz, 900 MHz, 1800 MHz and 2100 MHz band in January 2015 NIA should be made applicable for 2300 MHz and 2500 MHz bands. The same eligibility criteria should also be made applicable for 700 MHz band also.

     

    Partial spectrum available in Bihar, Rajasthan and North-East LSAs should not be put to auction till such time it becomes available at least in 75 per cent of total number of districts of the LSA including the State capital(s).

     

    The Authority recommended that DoT, in coordination with Defence and the TSPs, should complete the harmonisation process in the 1800 MHz band before upcoming auctions so that the entire spectrum that is made available due to this exercise is placed for bidding. The available spectrum must be put to auction in contiguous blocks, preferably in the block of 5 MHz.

     

    It recommended that the 1800 MHz band administratively assigned spectrum to Aircel in Haryana and MP, and Tata in HP should be taken back. The Authority also recommended that the 800 MHz band be administratively assigned spectrum to Tata in WB and Quadrant in Punjab should be taken back. This spectrum should also be put to upcoming auction.

     

    The Authority recommended that DoT, in coordination with Defence and the TSPs, should complete the harmonisation process in the 1800 MHz band before upcoming auctions so that the entire spectrum that is made available due to this exercise is placed for bidding. The available spectrum must be put to auction in contiguous blocks, preferably in the block of 5 MHz.

     

    The Authority recommended that DoT should ensure that the spectrum surrendered by TTSL is not kept idle and takes appropriate legal remedies to put it in the upcoming auction.  

     

    Additionally, the entire available spectrum in 2100 MHz band, including spectrum taken back from STEL, should be put to auction.

     

    Spectrum in 700 MHz band should be offered in the block size of 5 MHz (paired). In case a TSP is able to win more than one block of spectrum in the upcoming auctions, it should be allocated spectrum in contiguous blocks.

     

    In case a TSP is able to win more than one block of spectrum in 2100 MHz band, it should be allocated spectrum in contiguous blocks. Similarly, if the TSP already having spectrum in the 2100 MHz band, acquires additional carrier, it should be ensured that all its carriers are contiguous.  

     

    Spectrum in the 2300 MHz and 2500 MHz bands should be put to auction in the block size of 10 MHz (unpaired). Currently, spectrum trading in 2300/2500 MHz band is permitted in the block size of 20 MHz. The Authority also recommended that after network synchronisation of all the TDD networks, spectrum trading in 2300/2500 MHz band should be permitted in the blocks of 10 MHz.

     

    Existing provision of a cap of 25 per cent of the ‘total spectrum assigned’ in 700/800/900/1800/ 2100/2300/2500 MHz bands and 50 per cent within a given band in each of the access service area shall apply for total spectrum holding by each TSP.

     

    The roll-out obligations to be imposed for licensees who acquire access spectrum in 700 MHz band should be: all towns/villages having population of 15,000 or more but less than 50,000 to be covered within five years of effective date of allocation of spectrum for access services and all villages having population of 10,000 or more but less than 15,000 to be covered within seven years of effective date of allocation of spectrum; to prevent, duplication of infrastructure, a TSP should also be permitted to fulfil the obligations by sharing network of other operator to the extent permissible as per guidelines/instructions applicable from time to time.

     

    The Authority recommended that the quantum of test fee for the purpose of roll-out testing requirements may be reduced to 20 per cent of the existing rates for testing in the block headquarters (for phase 3, 4 and 5 of the rollout obligations) and similarly for testing of coverage in rural SDCAs.

  • TRAI recommends high reserve prices for spectrum auction; TSPs unhappy

    TRAI recommends high reserve prices for spectrum auction; TSPs unhappy

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) today recommended rates for auction of spectrum in the 700 Mhz, 800 Mhz, 900 Mhz, 1800 Mhz, 2100 Mhz, 2300 Mhz and 2500 Mhz bands.

     

    Earlier, TRAI chairman R S Sharma had said that the auction may be conducted in May or June this year.

     

    The base spectrum price per MHz for Delhi metro will be Rs 1,595 crore for 700 MHz, Rs 848 crore for 800 MHz, Rs 399 crore for 1800 MHz, Rs 554 crore for 2100 MHz, Rs 143 crore for 2300 MHz and Rs 143 crore for 2500 MHz band.

     

    TRAI said the base spectrum price per MHz for Karnataka (including Bangalore) will be Rs 740 crore for 700 MHz, Rs 303 crore for 800 MHz, Rs 558 crore for 900 MHz, Rs 185 crore for 1800 MHz, Rs 328 crore for 2100 MHz, Rs 98 crore for 2300 MHz and Rs 98 crore for 2500 MHz band.

     

    One TSP, who did not want to be named, told Indiantelevision.com that the prices were prohibitive and the government may be asked to reconsider the recommendations.

     

    The Authority reiterated its earlier recommendation that APT700 band plan should be adopted for the 700 MHz (698-806 MHz) spectrum band with FDD based 2×45 MHz frequency arrangement.

     

    TRAI has also recommended that entire available spectrum (2x35MHz) in the 700 MHz band should be put to auction in the upcoming auction.

     

    The Authority said test schedule for the roll-out obligations testing for 700 MHz should be released within a period of one year from the date of completion of auction in this band.

     

    The same roll-out obligations, which were imposed on the successful bidder of spectrum in 800 MHz, 900 MHz, 1800 and 2100 MHz band in the auctions held in 2015, should be prescribed for these spectrum bands in the upcoming auctions for new entrants. The Authority also said no fresh roll-out obligation should be imposed on existing service providers who are already operating their services in 800, 900, 1800 or 2100 MHz band, in case they acquire additional block of spectrum in the same band.

     

    The Authority recommended that the same eligibility criteria that have been made applicable for other bands viz. 800 MHz, 900 MHz, 1800 MHz and 2100 MHz band in January 2015 NIA should be made applicable for 2300 MHz and 2500 MHz bands. The same eligibility criteria should also be made applicable for 700 MHz band also.

     

    Partial spectrum available in Bihar, Rajasthan and North-East LSAs should not be put to auction till such time it becomes available at least in 75 per cent of total number of districts of the LSA including the State capital(s).

     

    The Authority recommended that DoT, in coordination with Defence and the TSPs, should complete the harmonisation process in the 1800 MHz band before upcoming auctions so that the entire spectrum that is made available due to this exercise is placed for bidding. The available spectrum must be put to auction in contiguous blocks, preferably in the block of 5 MHz.

     

    It recommended that the 1800 MHz band administratively assigned spectrum to Aircel in Haryana and MP, and Tata in HP should be taken back. The Authority also recommended that the 800 MHz band be administratively assigned spectrum to Tata in WB and Quadrant in Punjab should be taken back. This spectrum should also be put to upcoming auction.

     

    The Authority recommended that DoT, in coordination with Defence and the TSPs, should complete the harmonisation process in the 1800 MHz band before upcoming auctions so that the entire spectrum that is made available due to this exercise is placed for bidding. The available spectrum must be put to auction in contiguous blocks, preferably in the block of 5 MHz.

     

    The Authority recommended that DoT should ensure that the spectrum surrendered by TTSL is not kept idle and takes appropriate legal remedies to put it in the upcoming auction.  

     

    Additionally, the entire available spectrum in 2100 MHz band, including spectrum taken back from STEL, should be put to auction.

     

    Spectrum in 700 MHz band should be offered in the block size of 5 MHz (paired). In case a TSP is able to win more than one block of spectrum in the upcoming auctions, it should be allocated spectrum in contiguous blocks.

     

    In case a TSP is able to win more than one block of spectrum in 2100 MHz band, it should be allocated spectrum in contiguous blocks. Similarly, if the TSP already having spectrum in the 2100 MHz band, acquires additional carrier, it should be ensured that all its carriers are contiguous.  

     

    Spectrum in the 2300 MHz and 2500 MHz bands should be put to auction in the block size of 10 MHz (unpaired). Currently, spectrum trading in 2300/2500 MHz band is permitted in the block size of 20 MHz. The Authority also recommended that after network synchronisation of all the TDD networks, spectrum trading in 2300/2500 MHz band should be permitted in the blocks of 10 MHz.

     

    Existing provision of a cap of 25 per cent of the ‘total spectrum assigned’ in 700/800/900/1800/ 2100/2300/2500 MHz bands and 50 per cent within a given band in each of the access service area shall apply for total spectrum holding by each TSP.

     

    The roll-out obligations to be imposed for licensees who acquire access spectrum in 700 MHz band should be: all towns/villages having population of 15,000 or more but less than 50,000 to be covered within five years of effective date of allocation of spectrum for access services and all villages having population of 10,000 or more but less than 15,000 to be covered within seven years of effective date of allocation of spectrum; to prevent, duplication of infrastructure, a TSP should also be permitted to fulfil the obligations by sharing network of other operator to the extent permissible as per guidelines/instructions applicable from time to time.

     

    The Authority recommended that the quantum of test fee for the purpose of roll-out testing requirements may be reduced to 20 per cent of the existing rates for testing in the block headquarters (for phase 3, 4 and 5 of the rollout obligations) and similarly for testing of coverage in rural SDCAs.

  • TDSAT gives Maharashtra’s World Vision final chance to present case against Indiacast

    TDSAT gives Maharashtra’s World Vision final chance to present case against Indiacast

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) has given World Vision Cable Network, Maharashtra, one final chance to present its case against Indiacast UTV Media Distribution on 10 February.

     

    Noting that no one had appeared in the hearing, TDSAT chairperson Aftab Alam and members Kuldip Singh and B B Srivastava said, “If no one appears on the next date, the petition may be dismissed for non-prosecution.”

     

    The Tribunal noted that it appeared that after filing the petition, World Vision had lost interest in the matter but listed the matter for next month “as an indulgence.”

     

    In the order of 14 December, 2015, the Tribunal had noted that World Vision’s area of operation was coming under the Digital Addressable System (DAS) regime from 1 January, 2016 and it was observed that any final order on the petition may be passed only after the Tribunal was satisfied that World Vision was in a position to continue with its operations under the DAS regime with effect from the new year.  

     

    As an interim measure, Indiacast UTV Media was directed to restore the supply of its signals to World Vision on Rs 2 lakh on-account payment. 

     

    However, the Tribunal was informed by Indiacast counsel Shashank Shekhar that signals had not been restored as no payment had been made. 

     

    Shekhar also said no documents had been furnished to his client for making fresh arrangements for supply of signals in digital mode on a down-graded subscriber base.

  • TDSAT gives Maharashtra’s World Vision final chance to present case against Indiacast

    TDSAT gives Maharashtra’s World Vision final chance to present case against Indiacast

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) has given World Vision Cable Network, Maharashtra, one final chance to present its case against Indiacast UTV Media Distribution on 10 February.

     

    Noting that no one had appeared in the hearing, TDSAT chairperson Aftab Alam and members Kuldip Singh and B B Srivastava said, “If no one appears on the next date, the petition may be dismissed for non-prosecution.”

     

    The Tribunal noted that it appeared that after filing the petition, World Vision had lost interest in the matter but listed the matter for next month “as an indulgence.”

     

    In the order of 14 December, 2015, the Tribunal had noted that World Vision’s area of operation was coming under the Digital Addressable System (DAS) regime from 1 January, 2016 and it was observed that any final order on the petition may be passed only after the Tribunal was satisfied that World Vision was in a position to continue with its operations under the DAS regime with effect from the new year.  

     

    As an interim measure, Indiacast UTV Media was directed to restore the supply of its signals to World Vision on Rs 2 lakh on-account payment. 

     

    However, the Tribunal was informed by Indiacast counsel Shashank Shekhar that signals had not been restored as no payment had been made. 

     

    Shekhar also said no documents had been furnished to his client for making fresh arrangements for supply of signals in digital mode on a down-graded subscriber base.

  • TDSAT asks LCOs on signal source post complaints against Tejpur Cable

    TDSAT asks LCOs on signal source post complaints against Tejpur Cable

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) has asked Mahabhairab Cable Network and other cable networks to file an affidavit by 27 January disclosing the source of their signals after 31 December, 2015.

     

    Listing the matter for 29 January, TDSAT chairman Aftab Alam and members Kuldip Singh and B B Srivastava took note of the statement by the LCO counsel Vivek Sarin that his clients were not receiving the signals from Tejpur Cable Networks and others despite the statement by the latter that the signals were being transmitted.

     

    On the contrary, Sarin said none of the petitioners were receiving any signals from Tejpur Cable post 31 December, 2015 as the latter had removed the nodes through which the signals were being supplied to the LCOs. 

     

    Earlier, the Tribunal was told that all the LCOs had paid their dues to Tejpur Cable for the month of November 2015 (even though payments were made beyond the date as directed by the Tribunal).

     

    As far as the dues of subscription fee for December 2015 were concerned, Sarin said only petitioner no.23 was in default. Sarin stated that petitioner nos. 10, 24 and 25 have “merged” and continued their relationship with Tejpur Cable. He further stated that except petitioner no. 23, all other petitioners had paid the subscription fees for December 2015 to Tejpur Cable by 12 January, 2016. 

     

    Tejpur Cable counsel Sharath Sampath said four among the petitioners – nos.2, 10, 23 and 25 – were in default stated in payment of subscription fees for December 2015. 

     

    But notwithstanding this, Sampath said Tejpur Cable was continuing the supply of its signals to all the petitioners including the four defaulters.

  • TDSAT asks LCOs on signal source post complaints against Tejpur Cable

    TDSAT asks LCOs on signal source post complaints against Tejpur Cable

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) has asked Mahabhairab Cable Network and other cable networks to file an affidavit by 27 January disclosing the source of their signals after 31 December, 2015.

     

    Listing the matter for 29 January, TDSAT chairman Aftab Alam and members Kuldip Singh and B B Srivastava took note of the statement by the LCO counsel Vivek Sarin that his clients were not receiving the signals from Tejpur Cable Networks and others despite the statement by the latter that the signals were being transmitted.

     

    On the contrary, Sarin said none of the petitioners were receiving any signals from Tejpur Cable post 31 December, 2015 as the latter had removed the nodes through which the signals were being supplied to the LCOs. 

     

    Earlier, the Tribunal was told that all the LCOs had paid their dues to Tejpur Cable for the month of November 2015 (even though payments were made beyond the date as directed by the Tribunal).

     

    As far as the dues of subscription fee for December 2015 were concerned, Sarin said only petitioner no.23 was in default. Sarin stated that petitioner nos. 10, 24 and 25 have “merged” and continued their relationship with Tejpur Cable. He further stated that except petitioner no. 23, all other petitioners had paid the subscription fees for December 2015 to Tejpur Cable by 12 January, 2016. 

     

    Tejpur Cable counsel Sharath Sampath said four among the petitioners – nos.2, 10, 23 and 25 – were in default stated in payment of subscription fees for December 2015. 

     

    But notwithstanding this, Sampath said Tejpur Cable was continuing the supply of its signals to all the petitioners including the four defaulters.

  • TDSAT rejects 3 LCOs’ application for STB deposit refund from Indusind

    TDSAT rejects 3 LCOs’ application for STB deposit refund from Indusind

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Disputes Settlement & Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) has rejected applications by three local cable operators (LCOs) seeking refund from IndusInd Media & Communications Ltd of Rs 1100 per Set Top Box (STB). Of the Rs 1100, Rs 500 for each STB is allegedly the amount towards security deposit paid by respondents and another sum of Rs 600 per STB allegedly charged from the respondents from its customers as activation fee.

     

    While noting that evidence in this regard would be examined in the three main cases by IndusInd against R S Cable, OM Cable, and Vipin Sehrawat and others, the clause of the agreement relating to security deposit shows it was at the discretion of Indusind. 

     

    Though the security deposit is refundable, as regards installation and activation charges, there is no clause for the refund of same. The only receipt produced by the applicants mentions a payment of Rs 1,00,000 for 200 STBs. 

     

    TDSAT chairman Justice Aftab Alam and members Kuldip Singh and B B Srivastava said, “There is nothing to indicate that this payment was for security deposit. On the other hand, the statement annexed by the petitioner (Indusind) in its reply to the applications indicates this to be otherwise.”

     

    Rejecting the LCOs’ applications, the Tribunal said, “In view of the contrary stands taken by the parties on facts, we feel that evidences will be required in this regard. At this stage, in the absence of sufficient material to support the claim of the applicants/respondents, we do not find that a sufficient case is made for direction to refund any amount. We, however, leave this question open for determination at the time of the trial.”

     

    Indusind is a multi system operator (MSO) with a pan India presence, the respondents are LCOs. The petitioner came to the Tribunal challenging the migration of applicants/respondents to the network of another MSO. 

     

    In its interim appeal, it had asked for a direction to the LCOs to jointly return the STBs provided by it.

     

    The Tribunal, by an order dated 5 November 2015, directed the LCOs to return all the STBs to Indusind. However, the question whether Indusind might be liable to make any payment for the returned STBs to the LCOs or to deposit an equal amount before the Tribunal, was left expressly open. The return of the STBs was to be overseen by an Advocate Commissioner that was appointed for the purpose. The advocate commissioner said the LCOs had returned 2290 STBs.

     

    It was the case of the LCOs that they had paid a sum of Rs 1100 per STB and for the STBs that have been returned by them, these charges must be refunded by Indusind. 

     

    The reply to the application filed by Indusind says it only received installation charges of Rs 500 per STB from the LCOs on which it has even paid the service tax and the same is not refundable. In support of its pleadings, the MSO has annexed a statement titled “STB installation charge account” with its reply. 

     

    The LCOs have not provided any material to substantiate their claim except for a receipt of Rs 1,00,000 for 200 STBs in case of Bunny Cable (respondent no. 1 in one of the three petitions). Indusind said the receipt of Rs 1,00,000 in regard of Bunny Cable is also towards installation charges and already accounted for in the statement annexed by it.

     

    The LCOs argued that the agreement provides for a security deposit of Rs 500 per STB and the MSO would not have supplied the STBs without taking this. 

     

    According to clause 3.4 of the agreement between the MSO and the LCOs in all these petitions, the LCO was to collect rent, installment and security deposit in respect of the hardware/STBs from the subscribers and hand over the same to the petitioner. 

     

    In terms of the “Schedule A II. Standard Terms and Conditions,” the LCOs were required to deposit at the discretion of the MSO, an interest free and refundable security deposit of Rs 500 per STB.

  • TDSAT rejects 3 LCOs’ application for STB deposit refund from Indusind

    TDSAT rejects 3 LCOs’ application for STB deposit refund from Indusind

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Disputes Settlement & Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) has rejected applications by three local cable operators (LCOs) seeking refund from IndusInd Media & Communications Ltd of Rs 1100 per Set Top Box (STB). Of the Rs 1100, Rs 500 for each STB is allegedly the amount towards security deposit paid by respondents and another sum of Rs 600 per STB allegedly charged from the respondents from its customers as activation fee.

     

    While noting that evidence in this regard would be examined in the three main cases by IndusInd against R S Cable, OM Cable, and Vipin Sehrawat and others, the clause of the agreement relating to security deposit shows it was at the discretion of Indusind. 

     

    Though the security deposit is refundable, as regards installation and activation charges, there is no clause for the refund of same. The only receipt produced by the applicants mentions a payment of Rs 1,00,000 for 200 STBs. 

     

    TDSAT chairman Justice Aftab Alam and members Kuldip Singh and B B Srivastava said, “There is nothing to indicate that this payment was for security deposit. On the other hand, the statement annexed by the petitioner (Indusind) in its reply to the applications indicates this to be otherwise.”

     

    Rejecting the LCOs’ applications, the Tribunal said, “In view of the contrary stands taken by the parties on facts, we feel that evidences will be required in this regard. At this stage, in the absence of sufficient material to support the claim of the applicants/respondents, we do not find that a sufficient case is made for direction to refund any amount. We, however, leave this question open for determination at the time of the trial.”

     

    Indusind is a multi system operator (MSO) with a pan India presence, the respondents are LCOs. The petitioner came to the Tribunal challenging the migration of applicants/respondents to the network of another MSO. 

     

    In its interim appeal, it had asked for a direction to the LCOs to jointly return the STBs provided by it.

     

    The Tribunal, by an order dated 5 November 2015, directed the LCOs to return all the STBs to Indusind. However, the question whether Indusind might be liable to make any payment for the returned STBs to the LCOs or to deposit an equal amount before the Tribunal, was left expressly open. The return of the STBs was to be overseen by an Advocate Commissioner that was appointed for the purpose. The advocate commissioner said the LCOs had returned 2290 STBs.

     

    It was the case of the LCOs that they had paid a sum of Rs 1100 per STB and for the STBs that have been returned by them, these charges must be refunded by Indusind. 

     

    The reply to the application filed by Indusind says it only received installation charges of Rs 500 per STB from the LCOs on which it has even paid the service tax and the same is not refundable. In support of its pleadings, the MSO has annexed a statement titled “STB installation charge account” with its reply. 

     

    The LCOs have not provided any material to substantiate their claim except for a receipt of Rs 1,00,000 for 200 STBs in case of Bunny Cable (respondent no. 1 in one of the three petitions). Indusind said the receipt of Rs 1,00,000 in regard of Bunny Cable is also towards installation charges and already accounted for in the statement annexed by it.

     

    The LCOs argued that the agreement provides for a security deposit of Rs 500 per STB and the MSO would not have supplied the STBs without taking this. 

     

    According to clause 3.4 of the agreement between the MSO and the LCOs in all these petitions, the LCO was to collect rent, installment and security deposit in respect of the hardware/STBs from the subscribers and hand over the same to the petitioner. 

     

    In terms of the “Schedule A II. Standard Terms and Conditions,” the LCOs were required to deposit at the discretion of the MSO, an interest free and refundable security deposit of Rs 500 per STB.

  • DAS: TRAI to hold open house with MSOs, LCOs on draft interconnect agreement

    DAS: TRAI to hold open house with MSOs, LCOs on draft interconnect agreement

    NEW DELHI: Having received inputs from stakeholders and also directives from Courts to expedite the matter, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), on 28 January, will hold an Open House meeting on the draft model and standard interconnection agreements between multi-system operators (MSOs) and local cable operators (LCOs) for digital addressable system (DAS).

     

    The regulator had issued a consultation paper on 9 December on the issue and asked for comments and counter-comments on 31 December and 7 January respectively.

     

    The meeting will be held at the PHD Chamber building in south Delhi.

     

    The paper was aimed at reducing disputes and ensures that the regulations for pacts between MSOs and LCOs can only be entered into on the basis of interconnect agreements.

     

    The interconnection regulation further provides that the interconnection agreement between the MSO and its linked LCO shall have the details of various activities rendered by LCO and MSOs, and the revenue settlement between the parties for these services. The regulatory framework applicable for DAS also provides that the revenue share between LCO and MSO shall be determined by mutual agreement. In case the MSO and the LCO fail to arrive at mutual agreement, TRAI has mandated the subscription revenue share between the MSO and the LCO as a fall back arrangement.

     

    The model is the outcome of interactions with MSOs and LCOs in various parts of the country between January and October last year, with the objective of enhancing awareness about the regulatory framework among stakeholders and to assess the compliance of the regulatory framework.