Tag: A K Bhargava

TRAI landing page norms stayed till 22 December 2017

NEW DELHI: The direction on landing page norms issued by the Telecom Regulatory Authority (TRAI) of India has been stayed till 22 December 2017 following an appeal in the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT).

Even as the tribunal admitted the petitions for hearing, it said: “Since there is a prayer for stay of the impugned direction dated 8 November 2017 issued by TRAI, let the matter be listed on 22 December 2017 under the head “for orders” to consider that prayer in light of the reply of the respondent.”

“Till then, the impugned direction shall not be given effect to,” it added further.

Chairman Shiva Keerti Singh and members B B Srivastava and A K Bhargava gave TRAI two weeks’ time for filing the reply. Further time of two weeks is granted to the appellants to file the rejoinder.

On November 8, TRAI had issued a direction to all broadcasters and distributors of television channels to not place any registered satellite television channel. TRAI had said the orders would be implemented within 15 days.

The direction was challenged in TDSAT by Bennett Coleman and Company Limited (BCCL), Den Networks Limited (Den), All India Digital Cable Federation (AIDCF), Fastway Transmission Private Limited, and Satellite Channels Private Limited.

Den has appealed that the “impugned direction issued by the respondent, Telecom Regulatory Authority of India, are beyond the jurisdiction of the authority as given to it under TRAI Act.” It further said that the TRAI direction was curtailing the “freedom of the distributor of TV channels to position the channels over their network”.

TRAI had said in its November 8 direction that it had been repeatedly brought to the authority’s attention by various stakeholders that satellite TV channels are placed on the landing page and this practise was influencing the television audience measurements/television ratings.

TRAI in its direction had also concluded that “this practice may affect the orderly growth of the sector and is against the spirit of the policy guidelines for TV rating agencies.”

Also read:

TRAI tightens landing-page norms

November 23, 2017
TDSAT rejects DD’s interim measure for FreeDish

NEW DELHI: While giving relief to slot-holders on Doordarshan FreeDish, to ensure their continuity till the government decides its new policy over the next two months, the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Arbitration Tribunal (TDSAT) also rejected the interim formula proposed by Doordarshan in its letter to the main petitioner Cinema 24×7.

TDSAT chairman justice Shiva Keerti Singh, and members B B Srivastava and A K Bhargava said: “We find no good reason either from the submission or from the order of the respondent (Prasar Bharati) as to why the earlier direction and policy on pro-rata basis is being discontinued, that too when the respondents have claimed that a regular policy to replace the existing policy is likely to come within two months.”

The tribunal also rejected the submission by Prasar Bharati counsel Rajeev Sharma and additional solicitor general Tushar Mehta that no interim order was required in view of the order of Prasar Bharati of 27 October 2017.

The tribunal fixed the next date of hearing on 14 December 2017 and said that rejoinder if any by the broadcasters could be filed within two weeksafter the four weeks given to Prasar Bharati to file its reply.

The full text of the order of the tribunal was:

“To avoid undue hardship to the petitioners and possible discrimination vis-a-vis those who have been earlier granted continuity on pro-rata basis, we pass the following interim directions:

(i) The petitioners or others similarly situated as them, who need continuity because of non-holding of the e-auction and have applied or apply for the same, shall be allowed continuity on pro-rata basis.

(ii) The respondent will be entitled to charge on pro-rata basis either on the basis of the highest bid amount or the reserved price whichever is higher. We further clarify that the highest bid amount would mean the highest bid in that category in the preceding year.

(iii) This interim order will not create any right or equity in favour of anyone and the arrangement shall come to end as soon the central government declares its new general policy and take steps to fill up the slots in accordance with such policy. It is clarified that it will not be open for any petitioner or other operator to claim any right to continue on the basis of such interim arrangement.

(iv) The benefit of this interim arrangement shall be made available to the willing petitioners and other similarly situated operators at once and in any case within three days of their approaching the concerned respondent with an application.

All the petitions are admitted.”

The tribunal also analysed the proposed interim formula proposed by Doordarshan. It said “In the final analysis, the order declares the stand of the respondent with regard to “interim measures” in the following words:

“Now therefore in view of above, DD can as an interim measure follow a model on the pattern of FM auction policy of the government for two months or till the central government policy is made, whichever is earlier for the channels which are going to be off the air, on completion of their contract period may be offered continuity of operation at the highest bid amount for any of the channels auctioned in the past, together with revenue sharing at the rate of 50 per cent of the gross profit or 4 per cent of the gross revenue or 2.5 per cent of upfront highest bid amount whichever is higher. This system, as an interim arrangement, should be operated on first come first served basis if the terms and conditions of the short duration extension are acceptable to the existing contract holder.

The interim arrangement / measure is irrespective of and notwithstanding the contents of the proceedings pending before the hon’ble tribunal and / or any other proceedings, if any, this interim measure will not create any right or equity in favour of anyone and shall come to end automatically upon the central government declaring its policy or after two months whichever is earlier and it will not be open for any operator to claim any right to continue or any other right based upon such an interim measure.”

Sharma and Mehta had made it clear during arguments that this formula was akin to the formula applied in the FM Radio auctions.

Apart from Cinema 24×7 which runs WoW Cinema and News Nation Network Pvt Ltd who had filed the case, four other petitioners joined the case yesterday with fresh petitions: Enterr 10 TV Pvt Ltd, B4U Broadband India Pvt Ltd, Independent News Service Pvt Ltd, and ABP News Network Pvt Ltd.

These broadcasters filed either because of their channels having either gone off the air or the likelihood that they will go off air very soon due to efflux of time leading to expiry of the annual agreement and a decision by the respondent not to hold the 37th e-Auction till further orders. The letter to Cinema 24×7 itself noted that some channels are going off air this month and some in February next year.

The tribunal was informed in September by Prasar Bharati that the e-Auction was put on hold because a new policy was under contemplation and the pubcaster wanted to take steps for filling the slots falling vacant in terms of the new policy.

The tribunal noted that: “The petitioners have no quarrel with the stand and they are not opposed to the respondent taking steps for filling up the slots on regular basis as per their new policy as and when it is formulated and implemented. Their grievance is that such producers who have been enjoying slots on the basis of their offer in the auction should not be thrown out of their vocation and the public should not be deprived of their channel because of there being no policy in the interregnum. They are against such state of vacuum”.

October 28, 2017
Jio HNY: TDSAT raps TRAI as contest deepens

MUMBAI: Telecom tribunal TDSAT has ordered the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) to take a stand on Reliance Jio’s free 4G offer in reasonable time. A tribunal bench, comprising A K Bhargava and B B Srivastava, heard arguments of both sides — TRAI and Airtel — and posted the matter for 1 February, PTI reported.

Meanwhile, other telecom operators in the country are scrambling to catch up.

The new TDSAT order came while hearing a petition filed by Bharti Airtel, against TRAI decision allowing Reliance Jio to continue with its promotional offer beyond the stipulated 90 days, alleging that the regulator acted as “a mute spectator” to violations.

Reliance Jio earlier chose not to respond to queries regarding its reply to TRAI that was expected on 29 December in connection with questions raised against alleged violations in extending its free offer till 31 March 2017 much beyond its introductory offer. After two emailed queries and phone calls from indiantelevision.com, Jio chose not to respond.

Airtel had filed a petition before TDSAT accusing TRAI of being ‘sleeping trustee’ to the violations carried out by Jio. In the petition, Airtel had alleged that TRAI had “erroneously” concluded that since Jio’s promotional offer of free services was only valid till 3 December, it is consistent with the direction for 90 days.

Jio, in a meeting with TRAI, had reportedly said that the latest offer was different from the previous offer as, in the former, the company provided 4GB of free data per day, but in the latter case, it restricted the free internet up to 1GB under Fair Usage Policy. Jio also stressed the fact that in the new offer if the data limit was exhausted, then one had to buy recharge vouchers, which was not the case in the initial offer.

Meanwhile Airtel and Idea offered free data to woo 4G users eventually deepening the telecom price war. Bharti said it would offer three gigabytes of free 4G data per month until the end of the year for customers who switch to some of its plans from other carriers and to existing customers who upgrade to 4G by 28 February. Idea Cellular is reportedly going to offer unlimited free data to topple Jio and Airtel’s plans. Idea, which ranks third in Indian telecom ranking, will now come up with new 4G data packs with an extended validity of up to one and half years. BSNL has also started offering unlimited free calls for six months at Rs 144. Vodafone and BSNL too have come up with cheaper plans.

Also read: TRAI violations query: Reliance Jio mum on ‘response’

January 6, 2017
Jio HNY: TDSAT raps TRAI as contest deepens

MUMBAI: Telecom tribunal TDSAT has ordered the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) to take a stand on Reliance Jio’s free 4G offer in reasonable time. A tribunal bench, comprising A K Bhargava and B B Srivastava, heard arguments of both sides — TRAI and Airtel — and posted the matter for 1 February, PTI reported.

Meanwhile, other telecom operators in the country are scrambling to catch up.

The new TDSAT order came while hearing a petition filed by Bharti Airtel, against TRAI decision allowing Reliance Jio to continue with its promotional offer beyond the stipulated 90 days, alleging that the regulator acted as “a mute spectator” to violations.

Reliance Jio earlier chose not to respond to queries regarding its reply to TRAI that was expected on 29 December in connection with questions raised against alleged violations in extending its free offer till 31 March 2017 much beyond its introductory offer. After two emailed queries and phone calls from indiantelevision.com, Jio chose not to respond.

Airtel had filed a petition before TDSAT accusing TRAI of being ‘sleeping trustee’ to the violations carried out by Jio. In the petition, Airtel had alleged that TRAI had “erroneously” concluded that since Jio’s promotional offer of free services was only valid till 3 December, it is consistent with the direction for 90 days.

Jio, in a meeting with TRAI, had reportedly said that the latest offer was different from the previous offer as, in the former, the company provided 4GB of free data per day, but in the latter case, it restricted the free internet up to 1GB under Fair Usage Policy. Jio also stressed the fact that in the new offer if the data limit was exhausted, then one had to buy recharge vouchers, which was not the case in the initial offer.

Meanwhile Airtel and Idea offered free data to woo 4G users eventually deepening the telecom price war. Bharti said it would offer three gigabytes of free 4G data per month until the end of the year for customers who switch to some of its plans from other carriers and to existing customers who upgrade to 4G by 28 February. Idea Cellular is reportedly going to offer unlimited free data to topple Jio and Airtel’s plans. Idea, which ranks third in Indian telecom ranking, will now come up with new 4G data packs with an extended validity of up to one and half years. BSNL has also started offering unlimited free calls for six months at Rs 144. Vodafone and BSNL too have come up with cheaper plans.

Also read: TRAI violations query: Reliance Jio mum on ‘response’

January 6, 2017
Clarify status with Star India, TDSAT asks Canara Star

NEW DELHI: Canara Star Communications Pvt. Ltd Karnataka, which has a long-pending dispute with Star India with regard to payments, has been given one more opportunity by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal to reply to an affidavit of 23 March 2016 by the broadcaster alleging there was no entity of the name of the MSO on the website of the Corporate Affairs Ministry.

Canara Star was given one more week from 20 December 2016 to file its affidavit, and Star India was permitted to respond to the affidavit if it so desired.

Members B B Srivastava and A K Bhargava put up the matter for further hearing on 20 January 2017.

The Tribunal said: “It is seen that the affidavit which has been filed by Canara Star is not prima facie in conformity with the directions given by the Tribunal on 18 December 2015.

Canara Star had originally come before the Tribunal against disconnection notices by Star India as for default in payment. One of the grounds on which the disconnection notice was challenged was that another MSO had started operating in those areas and, as a result, the petitioner’s subscriber base had gone down substantially and the petitioner had been making request for downgradation of its subscriber base and consequently a reduction in the fixed fee payable by it as monthly subscription fee.

As there appeared to be some substance in the petitioner’s grievance, and, on a joint request, the matter was referred to the Mediation Centre. The Tribunal was informed that, before the Mediation Centre could intervene, the parties were able to arrive at some understanding in regard to Kumta and Bhatkal areas but Canara Star was also getting signals from Star India for transmission in the DAS area of Bangalore and there too the MSO happened to be in default in payment of the subscription fees.

Star India wanted a comprehensive settlement that should cover both analogue and digital areas covering Bangalore also.

Canara, which has allegedly sold its business to another MSO called All Digital, was to produce its deed of transfer of establishment to All Digital which was made a party in the petition filed by Star India.

Earlier this year, Canara Star had been asked by the TDSAT to present a payment schedule to Star India to settle their dispute.

However, then chairman Justice Aftab Alam and members — Kuldip Singh and B B Srivastava accepted the plea by Star India counsel Arjun Natarajan that this schedule should not come in the way of its requirement to furnish a guarantee. Earlier, on 4 February, the Bench had granted a week’s time to Canara Star represented by Counsel Tushar Singh, to furnish a guarantee.

In terms of the earlier order of 14 January, the directors of Canara Star were present in person before TDSAT on 29 January.

In the hearing in third week of December, the Tribunal had asked Canara Star to intimate Star India whether it admits the SMS reports submitted by the broadcaster for the period 2014 to January 2015.

The common order by the Tribunal on three petitions including one by Star India against Canara Star claiming recovery dues of around Rs 3 crore pertaining to the MSO’s operations in DAS area of Bangalore said this was subject to the two parties failing to arrive at a final settlement.

Also read:

Canara Star asked by TDSAT to pay Star India Rs 18.91 lakh subject to final outcome of dispute

December 23, 2016
Clarify status with Star India, TDSAT asks Canara Star

NEW DELHI: Canara Star Communications Pvt. Ltd Karnataka, which has a long-pending dispute with Star India with regard to payments, has been given one more opportunity by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal to reply to an affidavit of 23 March 2016 by the broadcaster alleging there was no entity of the name of the MSO on the website of the Corporate Affairs Ministry.

Canara Star was given one more week from 20 December 2016 to file its affidavit, and Star India was permitted to respond to the affidavit if it so desired.

Members B B Srivastava and A K Bhargava put up the matter for further hearing on 20 January 2017.

The Tribunal said: “It is seen that the affidavit which has been filed by Canara Star is not prima facie in conformity with the directions given by the Tribunal on 18 December 2015.

Canara Star had originally come before the Tribunal against disconnection notices by Star India as for default in payment. One of the grounds on which the disconnection notice was challenged was that another MSO had started operating in those areas and, as a result, the petitioner’s subscriber base had gone down substantially and the petitioner had been making request for downgradation of its subscriber base and consequently a reduction in the fixed fee payable by it as monthly subscription fee.

As there appeared to be some substance in the petitioner’s grievance, and, on a joint request, the matter was referred to the Mediation Centre. The Tribunal was informed that, before the Mediation Centre could intervene, the parties were able to arrive at some understanding in regard to Kumta and Bhatkal areas but Canara Star was also getting signals from Star India for transmission in the DAS area of Bangalore and there too the MSO happened to be in default in payment of the subscription fees.

Star India wanted a comprehensive settlement that should cover both analogue and digital areas covering Bangalore also.

Canara, which has allegedly sold its business to another MSO called All Digital, was to produce its deed of transfer of establishment to All Digital which was made a party in the petition filed by Star India.

Earlier this year, Canara Star had been asked by the TDSAT to present a payment schedule to Star India to settle their dispute.

However, then chairman Justice Aftab Alam and members — Kuldip Singh and B B Srivastava accepted the plea by Star India counsel Arjun Natarajan that this schedule should not come in the way of its requirement to furnish a guarantee. Earlier, on 4 February, the Bench had granted a week’s time to Canara Star represented by Counsel Tushar Singh, to furnish a guarantee.

In terms of the earlier order of 14 January, the directors of Canara Star were present in person before TDSAT on 29 January.

In the hearing in third week of December, the Tribunal had asked Canara Star to intimate Star India whether it admits the SMS reports submitted by the broadcaster for the period 2014 to January 2015.

The common order by the Tribunal on three petitions including one by Star India against Canara Star claiming recovery dues of around Rs 3 crore pertaining to the MSO’s operations in DAS area of Bangalore said this was subject to the two parties failing to arrive at a final settlement.

Also read:

Canara Star asked by TDSAT to pay Star India Rs 18.91 lakh subject to final outcome of dispute

December 23, 2016
Net Neutrality: DoT Committee suggests plan of action, roots for expansion of OTT services

NEW DELHI: User rights on the Internet need to be ensured so that Telecom Service Providers (TSPs) and Internet Service Providers (ISPs) do not restrict the ability of the user to send, receive, display, use, post any legal content, application or service on the Internet, or restrict any kind of lawful Internet activity.

However only the Government can decide what constitutes legality in relation to the content, application or service, with scope for judicial adjudication in case of any dispute.

This has been stated by a Committee constituted by the Department of Telecom (DoT) and headed by member (Technology) A K Bhargava on 19 January this year to study Net Neutrality and its implications.

Other members were A K Mittal who is senior DDG TEC; Shashi Ranjan Kumar joint secretary (A); V Umashankar joint secretary (T); Narendra Nath – DDG (Security); and R M Agarwal – DDG (NT) who was also convenor of the committee.

The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) issued a consultation paper in March this year titled “Regulatory Framework for Over-the-Top (OTT) Services” where the issue of Net Neutrality in the backdrop of OTT services came to the fore.

The TRAI consultation paper sharply intensified the debate on Net Neutrality with broadcasters and telecom operators giving radically opposite views.

At the outset, the DOT Committee said India has 997 million telecom subscribers and 99.20 million broadband subscribers with an access to internet at speeds higher than 512 kbps. Out of about 300 million subscribers accessing the internet, around 93 per cent subscribers are on wireless media, whereas seven per cent are on fixed wire line media. Currently, both broadband and internet penetration in India is comparatively low in the global context.

In India, Internet traffic is likely to increase manifold in the next few years. There is a constant pressure for investment in network infrastructure and to expand capacities and increase penetration. Telecom infrastructure, being a capital intensive industry, will require significant investments by operators to meet the network capacity demands brought about by increasing broadband penetration, increasing speeds and increasing data usage.

Telecom service providers have also started facing competition from unlicensed application platforms, termed Over-the-Top (OTT) players, in their traditional voice communication field.

With an objective of enhancing revenue streams and to face competition from OTT players, telecom service providers have been exploring new opportunities for generating revenues from users and the content providers. Some of the models attempted by TSPs, such as charging higher.

The Committee said content and application providers cannot be permitted to act as gatekeepers and use network operations to extract value in violation of core principles of Net Neutrality, even if it is for an ostensible public purpose.

The Committee refrained from making any specific recommendation on search-neutrality, however, flags this issue as a concern for public policy.

In the report that runs into more than 100 pages, the Committee unhesitatingly recommends that “the core principles of Net Neutrality must be adhered to.”

The Committee suggested an enforcement process where the core principles of Net Neutrality may be made part of license conditions and the licensor may issue guidelines from time to time as learning process matures. Since Net Neutrality related cases would require specialized expertise, a cell in the DoT HQ may be set up to deal with such cases. In case of violations, the existing prescribed procedure may be followed. This would involve two stage process of review and appeal to ensure that decisions are objective, transparent and just.

The tariff shall be regulated by TRAI as at present. Whenever a new tariff is introduced it should be tested against the principles of Net Neutrality. Post implementation, complaint regarding a tariff violating principle of Net Neutrality may be dealt with by DoT. Net Neutrality issues arising out of traffic management would have reporting and auditing requirements, which may be performed and enforced by DoT. QoS issues fall within the jurisdiction of TRAI. Similarly reporting related to transparency requirements will need to be dealt with by TRAI. TRAI may take steps as deemed fit.

National security is paramount, regardless of treatment of Net Neutrality. The measures to ensure compliance of security related requirements from OTT service providers need to be worked out through inter-ministerial consultations.

India should take a rational approach and initiate action in making an objective policy, specific to the needs of our country. It says both innovation and infrastructure have to be promoted simultaneously and neither can spread without the other.

The primary goals of public policy in the context of Net Neutrality should be directed towards achievement of developmental aims of the country by facilitating “Affordable Broadband”, “Quality Broadband” and “Universal Broadband” for its citizens.

OTT application services have been traditionally available in the market for some time and such services enhance consumer welfare and increase productivity. Therefore, such services should be actively encouraged and any impediments in expansion and growth of OTT application services should be removed.

There should be a separation of “application layer” from “network layer” as application services are delivered over a licensed network.

Specific OTT communication services dealing with messaging should not be interfered with through regulatory instruments.

In case of VoIP OTT communication services, there exists a regulatory arbitrage wherein such services also bypass the existing licensing and regulatory regime creating a non-level playing field between TSPs and OTT providers both competing for the same service provision. Public policy response requires that regulatory arbitrage does not dictate winners and losers in a competitive market for service provision.

The existence of a pricing arbitrage in VoIP OTT communication services requires a graduated and calibrated public policy response.

In case of OTT VoIP international calling services, a liberal approach may be adopted. However, in case of domestic calls (local and national), communication services by TSPs and OTT communication services may be treated similarly from a regulatory angle for the present. The nature of regulatory similarity, the calibration of regulatory response and its phasing can be appropriately determined after public consultations and TRAI’s recommendations to this effect.

For OTT application services, there is no case for prescribing regulatory oversight similar to conventional communication services.

Legitimate traffic management practices may be allowed but should be “tested” against the core principles of Net Neutrality. General criteria against which these practices can be tested are as follows:

1.       TSPs/ISPs should make adequate disclosures to the users about their traffic management policies, tools and intervention practices to maintain transparency and allow users to make informed choices.

2.       Unreasonable traffic management, exploitative or anti-competitive in nature may not be permitted.

3.      Tariff plans offered by TSPs/ISPs must conform to the principles of Net Neutrality set forth in guidelines issued by the Government as Licensor and TRAI may examine the tariff filings made by TSPs/ISPs to determine whether the tariff plan conforms to the principles of Net Neutrality.

New legislation, whenever planned for replacing the existing legal framework, must incorporate principles of Net Neutrality. Till such time as an appropriate legal framework is enacted, interim provisions enforceable through licensing conditions as suggested by the Committee may be the way forward.

Since enforcing Net Neutrality principle is a new idea and may throw up many questions and problems in the days ahead, an oversight process may be set up by the government to advise on policies and processes, review guidelines, reporting and auditing procedures and enforcement of rules.

Capacity building through training, institution building and active engagement with stakeholders is essential. In order to deal with the complexities of the new digital world, a think-tank with best talent may also be set up.

Click here to read IAMAI welcomes DoT recommendations on Net Neutrality

July 16, 2015