ITV

Tag: Arguments

  • TRAI ad cap: Broadcasters move Delhi High Court

    TRAI ad cap: Broadcasters move Delhi High Court

    MUMBAI: The 12 minute ad cap case has had a change in venue – from the Telecom Disputes Settlement Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) to the Delhi High Court (HC). With the Supreme Court’s recent ruling that TDSAT does not have authority to hear cases challenging the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) regulations, broadcasters had filed a writ petition in the HC last Friday.

    The case is set to be heard on 17 December in the Delhi HC by Justice Manmohan. The appellants include the News Broadcasters Association (NBA), 9X Media, B4U, TV Vision, Sun TV, E24 and Pioneer Channel. The hearing for the case is set to begin afresh but the priority of the lawyers representing the broadcasters will be to get a stay order from the HC to disallow the TRAI from taking any coercive action against channels which are reportedly not following the 12 minute ad cap. Under the TRAI mandate, it can persecute channels who do not toe the line that it has set.

    “We will ask for a stay order on TRAI taking any punitive actions against broadcasters. Since the TDSAT had given a stay order earlier and the bench was headed by a SC judge Justice Aftab Alam, we hope we get it from the HC too,” says a senior executive.

    The case will by and large remain the same with the focus on the fact that the ad cap is not a regulation at all. However, since it is now the HC, the crux of the arguments will be on constitutional grounds such as Article 14 and Article 19 that talks about the right to equality and freedom of speech respectively.

    The channels will now have to go through the long drawn process of the hearing proceeding in the HC and getting the stay order against the regulator taking them to the cleaners for violation of the ad cao reglation. They have been fortunate not to have got the stick so far from the TRAI which could have prosecuted them as it was within its rights to do so.

  • TRAI presents its ad cap arguments

    TRAI presents its ad cap arguments

    MUMBAI: After nearly a week long argument from the News Broadcasters Association (NBA) and music channels – B4U, 9XM, Mastiii and M Tunes — it was time for regional players and the big daddy – the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) to present their side of the story on the ad cap.

    Among those who presented their case today were Polimer Media and south India biggie Sun TV. The channels brought to the fore a point from February 2011 when TRAI had confirmed that “there should not be any regulation at present on advertisement on both FTA and Pay channels.”

    It had taken this position in Petition No. 34(C) of 2011 in the TDSAT filed by a society called Utsarg against TRAI and several other broadcasters and content aggregators seeking a cap on television advertising time on the ground that these advertisements interfered with viewership of television programmes. The channels questioned the reversal in TRAI’s  stance today.

    Now, it was the turn of the TRAI to send its lawyer to make its deposition.  TRAI argued that it was right in taking recourse to  both the Acts – the Cable Networks Regulation Act 1995 as well as The Indian Telegraph Act 1885 and the TRAI Act – and it was empowered under both as broadcasters are licensees under the latter. To this, the bench comprising of Justice Aftab Alam and member Kuldip Singh said that if it already has the authority under the Cable TV Act then it should not have acted on the TRAI Act.
        

    However, TRAI argued that the Cable TV Act is applicable only to cable operators and the bench in turn responded that a broadcaster does not come under it then. TRAI claimed that they were merely interpreting section 7 (11) of the Cable TV Act of 1995 which says that the authority has the power to ‘seize equipment used for operating the cable television network’ if it is found to be breaching its other sections.

    On the laying of the ad cap regulation in Parliament, TRAI’s counsel said that it had submitted it to the relevant ministry. To this, the bench responded that the law decrees that it would become applicable only after it is accepted or rejected or modified in the house. All the actions TRAI takes won’t apply with retrospective effect. Hence if TRAI  prosecutes a broadcaster before laying in parliament would not that be a violation of fundamental rights was the question?  The argument was then that in such a situation it is beyond the jurisdiction of the TDSAT and comes under the ambit of the Supreme Court.

    One of the points raised by the petitioner channels was the possible misuse of the 12 minute ad cap regulation. It said that a broadcaster could have uneven advertising slots such as one minute of advertisement in the first 30 minutes while the next half an hour could have 11 minutes. Similarly the concept of clock hour too had its flaws. Hypothetically, a broadcaster could air 11 minutes of ads from7:49 pm to 8 pm and then another 11 minutes of commercials between 8:00 pm to 8:11 pm. That would mean TV viewers would be subjected to 22 minutes of commercials in an hour of television time, thus putting paid to TRAI’s mandate to maintain quality of service. To this, the TRAI claimed that all laws can be misused but then it doesn’t stop them from being made.

    TRAI will continue its arguments tomorrow.