ITV

Tag: IBF

  • Bombay HC to hear petitions against TRAI order

    Bombay HC to hear petitions against TRAI order

    MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court will hear on 26 February a petition filed by the Digital Cable Operators Association of Mumbai (DCOAM) and Maharashtra Cable Operations Foundation (MCOF), challenging the 'arbitrary' rules introduced by the TRAI.

    They challenged before the High Court the network capacity fee (NCF) implemented by TRAI under the NTO-2 regime. The operators’ main contention was with regard to the NCF cap of Rs 160/month fixed by TRAI and additional TV connections and discounts. The petitioners claimed that the NTO would hinder their basic right to do business.

    The court has set aside the matter for hearing for Wednesday.

    Adv Rahul Soman, who appeared for the operators, contended that the TRAI has not fixed an upper limit for extra channels. So, the situation is such that customers can demand any number of channels, which will hamper the cable operators’ business, argued the lawyer.

    A lot of stakeholders, in addition to some individuals, have moved various high courts in the country, challenging the TRAI’s new price regime. They include various broadcasters and bodies like the Indian Broadcasting Foundation (IBF).

    Early this year, TRAI stipulated 200 channels for a NCF of Rs 160. The regulator has also directed the DPOs not to charge more than the stipulated monthly charge of Rs 160 for providing all the available channels.  

  • NTO 2.0: Bombay High Court adjourns case to 26 Feb

    NTO 2.0: Bombay High Court adjourns case to 26 Feb

    MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court has adjourned the ongoing case between the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) and broadcasters on the new tariff order (NTO) to 26 February. During the last hearing , no interim relief had been granted.

    Last time, the advocate for TRAI made a statement at the very beginning that the arguments should be based only on the petition and not on the rejoinder. Countering that, the advocate for Film & TV Producers Guild of India stated that there is nothing new in the rejoinder and everything is available in public domain.

    He also touched upon the point of the newly imposed twin conditions levied in the amendment of new tariff order where one condition is the cap of Rs 12 in a bouquet, the other being the discount on channel bouquets to around 33 per cent.

    Earlier, broadcasters were giving higher discounts pursuant to cross subsidies available by including smaller channels in its bouquets, which was totally in favour of consumers. He argued that if a consumer has to watch the so-called popular/niche channels (terms used by TRAI), he has to pay a higher price and it will increase his monthly bill.

    He also continued that although they do not come under the direct purview of TRAI, the amendments in the tariff order can affect their revenue. As the regulatory body has put a cap of Rs 12 on pay channel that can be included in a bouquet, the broadcaster cannot charge more than Rs 12 for that pay channel in a bouquet.

    The broadcaster has to pay huge amount to acquire content. Due to the regulations, if the broadcaster is not able to include it in a bouquet, it may prefer not to acquire such high priced content. Moreover, if broadcasters can not acquire quality content, the customer will lose.

    While broadcasters have the flexibility to decide the price of its pay channel and the customer should be able to view quality content on his TV, both these conditions are violated by the order.

    Last month, the Indian Broadcasting Foundation (IBF) along with others has filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court against the TRAI order. The petitioners mentioned that the as amendments which has been notified in “consumer interest," will have exactly the opposite effect, leading to crippling of the business of broadcasters and ultimate suffering of the consumer.

  • NTO 2.0 case: No interim relief granted, to be heard on 12 Feb

    NTO 2.0 case: No interim relief granted, to be heard on 12 Feb

    MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court has listed the next hearing of the ongoing case between the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) and broadcasters on the new tariff order (NTO) on 12 February. No interim relief has been granted yet which can be argued at the next hearing. It has also been directed to issue a notice to Maharashtra advocate general.

    During Thursday’s hearing, the advocate for TRAI made a statement at the very beginning that the arguments should be based only on the petition and not on the rejoinder. Countering that, the advocate for Film & TV Producers Guild of India stated that there is nothing new in the rejoinder and everything is available in public domain.

    He also touched upon the point of the newly imposed twin conditions levied in the amendment of new tariff order where one condition is the cap of Rs 12 in a bouquet, the other being the discount on channel bouquets to around 33 per cent.

    Earlier, broadcasters were giving higher discounts pursuant to cross subsidies available by including smaller channels in its bouquets, which was totally in favour of consumers. He argued that if a consumer has to watch the so-called popular/niche channels (terms used by TRAI), he has to pay a higher price and it will increase his monthly bill.

    He also continued that although they do not come under the direct purview of TRAI, the amendments in the tariff order can affect their revenue. As the regulatory body has put a cap of Rs 12 on pay channel that can be included in a bouquet,  the broadcaster cannot charge more than Rs 12 for that pay channel in a bouquet.

    The broadcaster has to pay huge amount to acquire content. Due to the regulations, if the broadcaster is not able to include it in a bouquet, it  may prefer not to acquire such high priced content. Moreover, if broadcasters can not acquire quality content, the customer will lose.

    While broadcasters have the flexibility to decide the price of its pay channel and the customer should be able to view quality content on his TV, both these conditions are violated by the order.

    Earlier in the month, the Indian Broadcasting Foundation (IBF) along with others has filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court against the TRAI order. The petitioners mentioned that the as amendments which has been notified in “consumer interest," will have exactly the opposite effect, leading to crippling of the business of broadcasters and ultimate suffering of the consumer.

  • Cable Operators Welfare Federation counters IBF’s comments regarding NCF and NTO 2.0

    Cable Operators Welfare Federation counters IBF’s comments regarding NCF and NTO 2.0

    MUMBAI: The Cable Operators Welfare Federation (COWF) has countered the IBF’s claims regarding NCF. The IBF had said that by keeping NCF at Rs 160, distributors could charge for something that DD Free Dish is giving out free.

    COWF said that DD Free Dish is run on taxpayers’ money and channels pay a hefty sum to get a slot on it which they recover through ad rev.

    In a letter, the COWF has said that since the advent of the TV business, broadcasters have been portraying the LCO community in poor light as “cheaters/goons who never declared proper numbers”.

    The letter states, “This is perhaps a rare industry where a major stakeholder blames its distributors whenever things do not go their way. Once commercial terms are achieved, things go back to normal.” It goes on to say that broadcasters are also guilty of showing inflated declarations such as reach in order to gain advertisement tariff.

    Over the years, cable operators have constantly kept abreast of all the latest technologies. MSOs and LCOs also run a business and need to recover costs, just as broadcasters, the letter goes on to mention.

    “On the NCF, our observation in the past year is that its calculation is cumbersome and many customers still do not understand it and it takes a lot of our time explaining to customers how we have billed them. Hence we had suggested that a higher limit be set up for a fixed NCF for SD channels and HD channels, just as broadcasters were permitted a higher cap of Rs 19 per month, which will give us the freedom to charge as per different market scenarios and as per our ROW needs,” the letter states.

    It even mentions that LCOs have tried to limit the rate increase by passing on benefits to customers. Some smaller MSOs have passed on the benefits to LCOs. Many MSOs have several channels in the FTA pack because they earn from carriage, marketing and placement fees, the letter adds.

    In the end, the COWF requests the broadcaster community to work together. “We are open to discuss all means by which we can reduce NCF on a mutual basis as long as you can find ways to ensure that our revenues are protected,” it says.

  • Bombay HC grants no interim relief in IBF’s NTO case; matter posted for 22 Jan

    Bombay HC grants no interim relief in IBF’s NTO case; matter posted for 22 Jan

    MUMBAI: After the broadcasters moved to Bombay High Court on Monday, the high court has issued notice to the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) for filing response. The matter has been listed for next hearing on 22 January. No interim relief till the next hearing.

    The Indian Broadcasting Foundation (IBF), along with other broadcasters, had filed a writ petition in the court against TRAI, it read, “The petition under article 226 and 227 of the constitution of India has been filed praying, for a writ, order or direction quashing the amendments carried out vide the telecommunication (broadcasting and cable) services interconnections (addressable systems) (second amendment) regulations, 2020 along with the telecommunication (broadcasting and cable) services standards of quality and consumer protection (addressable systems) (third amendment) regulations, 2020 along with the telecommunication (broadcasting and cable) services (eighth) (addressable systems) tariff (second amendment) order, 2020 issued by the respondent (TRAI) on 1 January,”

    In the beginning of this month, the industry regulator modified certain provisions (described as impugned provisions) of the new price regime which was implemented last year. TRAI prescribed twin conditions on pricing –

    The sum of the a-la-carte rates of the pay channels (MRP)forming part of a bouquet shall in no case exceed one and half times the rate of the bouquet of which such pay channels are part

    The a-la-carte rates of each pay channel (MRP), forming part of a bouquet, shall in no case exceed three times the average rate of a pay channel of the bouquet of which such pay channel is a part.

    The authority also decided that only channels with MRP of Rs 12 or less will be permitted to be part of the bouquet offered by the broadcasters.

    How the amendments can harm the broadcasters’ business as well as consumer interest:

    The petitioners have mentioned that the amendments which have been notified in “consumer interest” will have exactly the opposite effect, leading to the crippling of the business of broadcasters and ultimate suffering to the consumer.

    It has also been mentioned that such crippling of the business would ultimately result either in closing down of the broadcasters’ channels or in diminishing the quality and the quantity of content available on TV channels to the consumer. In addition to that, the petitioners would lead in compelling the broadcasters to offer their channels only in a-la-carte format.

    Additionally, unlike under the 2017 Regulatory Regime, the new provisions prohibit broadcasters from giving any discount on the MRP of any bouquet to the DPO. Hence the broadcasters are of the view that they are completely dis-incentivised from creative bouquet offerings. They think that the new prohibition placed upon the broadcaster from offering a discount on bouquets will result in a huge reduction in DPOs’ demand for broadcaster-created bouquets, resulting, over a period of time, in discontinuation of bouquet offerings by broadcasters.

    The writ has been filed broadly to address the following issues:

    A Broadcaster’s freedom of pricing its own content has been taken away/ interfered with by the Respondent, as it continues to place fetters and unrealistic caps on the manner of offering the channels and pricing thereof.

    Despite admission by Respondent that offering of channels through bouquets is the preferred and prevalent practice, even from a subscriber’s viewpoint, the Impugned Provisions have the effect of dismantling and making unworkable any bouquet offering made by the broadcasters, by the placement of fetters that have no co-relation to the method or manner of offering content to the subscriber.

    A broadcaster’s effective freedom to price its channel with a view to recover/recoup its every increasing investment into content creation, is being taken away. The earlier imposed cap that prohibited any channel priced at more than Rs 19, as per the 2017 Interconnection Regulations and 2017 Tariff Order, has now been unilaterally and arbitrarily reduced to Rs.12 by the Impugned Provisions.

    A broadcaster’s freedom to offer its channels as part of one or more bouquets, has effectively been taken away, by prohibiting the broadcaster from offering any discount on the Maximum Retail Price of its bouquets; and further, by placing archaic and unworkable conditions to be followed by a broadcaster while creating a bouquet.

    At the same time, the Delivery Platform Operator (“DPO”) has been given further freedom to offer channels as part of bouquet and to give discounts on the bouquet prices, by unilaterally reducing the price of the channel received by the DPO from the broadcaster, has been kept intact and in fact, strengthened.

    A Broadcaster has effectively been prohibited from offering, as part of any bouquet, Niche channels, including sports channels, whose content consists of expensive and exclusively licensed rights to broadcast sporting events.

    To address the issues, IBF on Friday also held a press conference in Mumbai. The broadcasters of India came in support of each other under the shelter of IBF to voice their concerns against the new TRAI amendments of the new tariff order. All the top bosses of the major networks have agreed to the fact that this revision is going to leave severe adverse effect on all the players. The industry may explore legal options to fight the disruption.

  • IBF files writ petition against TRAI in Bombay High Court

    IBF files writ petition against TRAI in Bombay High Court

    MUMBAI: Amid the ongoing dispute in the broadcasting industry regarding amendments to the tariff order, the Indian Broadcasting Foundation (IBF), along with other broadcasters, has filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court against the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI).

    “The petition under article 226 and 227 of the constitution of India has been filed praying, for a writ, order or direction quashing the amendments carried out vide the telecommunication (broadcasting and cable) services interconnections (addressable systems) (second amendment) regulations, 2020 along with the telecommunication (broadcasting and cable) services standards of quality and consumer protection (addressable systems) (third amendment) regulations, 2020 along with the telecommunication (broadcasting and cable) services (eighth) (addressable systems) tariff (second amendment) order, 2020 issued by the respondent (TRAI) on 1 January,” the petition read.

    According to industry sources, the hearing of the case will come up tomorrow.

    In the beginning of this month, the industry regulator modified certain provisions (described as impunged provisions ) of the new price regime which was implemented last year. TRAI prescribed twin conditions on pricing –

    · The sum of the a-la-carte rates of the pay channels (MRP)forming part of a bouquet shall in no case exceed one and half times the rate of the bouquet of which such pay channels are a part

    · The a-la-carte rates of each pay channel (MRP),forming part of a bouquet, shall in no case exceed three times the average rate of a pay channel of the bouquet of which such pay channel is a part.

    The authority also decided that only channels with MRP of Rs 12 or less will be permitted to be part of the bouquet offered by the broadcasters.

    How the amendments can harm the broadcasters’ business as well as consumer interest :

     The petitioners have mentioned that the amendments which has been notified in “consumer interest” will have exactly the opposite effect, leading to crippling of the business of broadcasters and ultimate suffering to the consumer.

    It has also been mentioned that such crippling of the business would ultimately result either in closing down of the broadcasters’ channels or in diminishing the quality and the quantity of content available on TV channels to the consumer. In addition to that, the petitioners would lead in compelling the broadcasters to offer their channels only in a-la-carte format.

    Additionally, unlike under the 2017 Regulatory Regime, the new provisions prohibit broadcasters from giving any discount on the MRP of any bouquet to the DPO. Hence the broadcasters are of the view that they are completely dis-incentivised from creative bouquet offerings. They think that the new prohibition placed upon the broadcaster from offering a discount on bouquets will result in a huge reduction in DPOs’ demand for broadcaster-created bouquets, resulting, over a period of time, in discontinuation of bouquet offerings by broadcasters.

    The writ has been filed broadly to address the following issues:

    · A Broadcaster’s freedom of pricing its own content has been taken away/ interfered with by the Respondent, as it continues to place fetters and unrealistic caps on the manner of offering the channels and pricing thereof.

    · Despite admission by Respondent that offering of channels through bouquets is the preferred and prevalent practice, even from a subscriber’s viewpoint, the Impugned Provisions have the effect of dismantling and making unworkable any bouquet offering made by the broadcasters, by placement of fetters that have no co-relation to the method or manner of offering content to the subscriber.

    · A broadcaster’s effective freedom to price its channel with a view to recover/recoup its every increasing investment into content creation, is being taken away. The earlier imposed cap that prohibited any channel priced at more than Rs 19, as per the 2017 Interconnection Regulations and 2017 Tariff Order, has now been unilaterally and arbitrarily reduced to Rs.12 by the Impugned Provisions.

    · A broadcaster’s freedom to offer its channels as part of one or more bouquets, has effectively been taken away, by prohibiting the broadcaster from offering any discount on the Maximum Retail Price of its bouquets; and further, by placing archaic and unworkable conditions to be followed by a broadcaster while creating a bouquet.

    · At the same time, the Delivery Platform Operator (“DPO”) has been given further freedom to offer channels as part of bouquet and to give discounts on bouquet prices, by unilaterally reducing the price of the channel received by the DPO from the broadcaster, has been kept intact and in fact, strengthened.

    · A Broadcaster has effectively been prohibited from offering, as part of any bouquet, Niche channels, including sports channels, whose content consists of expensive and exclusively licensed rights to broadcast sporting events.

    To address the issues, IBF on Friday also held a press conference in Mumbai. The broadcasters of India came in support of each other under the shelter of IBF to voice their concerns against the new TRAI amendments of the new tariff order. All the top bosses of the major networks have agreed to the fact that this revision is going to leave severe adverse affect on all the players. The industry may explore legal options to fight the disruption.

  • IBF questions need for new tariff order revisions

    IBF questions need for new tariff order revisions

    MUMBAI: The last six months have been rather unsettling for the television sector what with the regulator the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India revising tariff regulations for pay TV at least a couple of times. Indian broadcasting CEOs hence came together under the umbrella of the Indian Broadcasting Foundation (IBF) on 10 January to air their concerns about the latest amendments in the new tariff order.  They were more than clear that the latest revision is going to adversly affect their toplines and bottomlines and hence that may leave them no recourse but to consider legal options.

    While the new price regime implemented in the last year did not have enough time to settle, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) once again revised the order recently including reducing the pricing cap to Rs 12 per channel to be included in a bouquet, down from Rs 19 per channel.

    “Even as the new regime was settling down, on 1 January 2020, TRAI notified certain amendments to the New Tariff Order and Interconnection Regulations for the broadcast sector. These amendments attempt to make further disruptive changes in an industry already grappling with the paradigm shift to an MRP based pricing regime,” IBF president and  Sony Pictures Networks MD & CEO N P Singh expressed.

    He also mentioned that while the broadcasting industry is apprehensive about the magnitude of changes, they support bringing in order into the system.

    Singh also noted that the collective cost to the broadcasters was well over Rs 1,000 crore in just communicating the changes to the consumers. Moreover, there was an overall loss of 12-15 million subscribers in the process.

    Walt Disney Company Asia Pacific president, Star  Disney India chairman Uday Shankar also raised the question that if a comprehensive exercise was done last year, then what is the need for the current revision. He also added that if TRAI is so concerned with bringing down the price for the consumer then why, in the name of NCF (network capacity fee), distributors are being allowed to charge as much as Rs 160 for something that DD FreeDish is giving for free.

    “The objective of NTO 1 was first – to give choice to consumers, second – to bring transparency and third – to reduce litigation. While only the first two have happened, it's too early to talk about the third. Statistically, overall 94 per cent of Indians are aware of the NTO and the choices they have because of the efforts made by the broadcast industry collectively. The month on month churn in industry shows that people are continuously fine-tuning their choices. The other objective of NTO was transparencey which it has also brought in. The question therefore, is ‘what is the fundamental need to change again?,’" posed Viacom18 Group CEO & MD & IBF vice president Sudhanshu Vats.

    "India is a heterogenous country with different choices and abilities to pay. In every sector there is a wide spectrum and that needs to play out more in Indian media as well. This push for consistency shouldn’t come in the way of the industry's and the economy's growth. In the M&E industry there is a lot of dynamism and flux and hence the broadcast sector needs to be able to settle down. If there has to be any change we need to allow for enough time for its implementation and also changes shouldn't be suggested so frequently," he added.

    Shankar also emphasised on the problems that long-tail channels will face. He commented that the latest revisions will seriously threaten the existence of smaller channels. He also raised concerns about the quantum of investment in content, which broadcasters have been making. 

    Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd (ZEEL) CEO & MD Punit Goenka also questioned if these changes are in line with the government’s stated intent of improving the ease of doing business. According to him, whether it will really benefit end consumers is also arguable. 

     

     

  • NTO 2.0 will affect viability of pay TV industry: IBF

    NTO 2.0 will affect viability of pay TV industry: IBF

    MUMBAI: The broadcast sector has expressed its shock and dismay with the latest notification from TRAI issued on 1 January 2020, amending the new tariff order (NTO) and interconnection regulations. Indian Broadcasting Foundation (IBF) believes that both the amendments will severely impair broadcasters' ability to compete with other unregulated platforms and adversely affect the viability of the pay TV industry.

    "IBF is disappointed at the lack of understanding shown by the regulator. It will strategise its future course of action, including evaluating legal options, based on feedback from its member channels and networks," said the body.  

    The association in its response to TRAI's consultation paper had pleaded with the regulator to adopt a "soft touch" and allow the industry to come to terms with the NTO before making further changes. "In fact, TRAI itself had acknowledged this need by proposing a two year moratorium on further regulation. It appears all IBF's pleas have been ignored. Unfortunately, in this exercise, content creators and owners have been disempowered and the entire authority has shifted to the middlemen," expressed IBF.

    IBF has conveyed that these changes will have very significant and industry growth-hampering ramifications for the broadcast sector. At a time when the economic environment is tough, this tariff order will force a lot of channels to shut down and will lead to unemployment in the sector. While the government is looking at ramping up growth, these changes will have the opposite effect for the broadcast sector just recovering from the twin shocks of NTO in the first half of 2019 and the ad slowdown business.

    IBF said that it has always believed that consumers pay for the value of the content. Post NTO, the ecosystem had just settled down with about 200 million consumers choosing their favourite channels. "We have to allow the changes to fully settle down and the market forces to prevail while resisting the temptation to continuously tinker with the regulation. The Regulator’s intent was to address infirmities in the NTO, however, it has been done solely at the cost of the broadcasting fraternity," said IBF.   

    In the last 15 years of regulating the broadcast sector TRAI has issued more than 36 tariff orders and ancillary regulations in an attempt to micromanage what is arguably the cheapest form of news and entertainment in the world. This goes contrary to the government's stated position of ensuring the "ease of doing business". While TRAI claims the amendments are in the consumers’ interest, it appears to have conveniently forsworn the interest of broadcasters. This change will only benefit the DPOs as they have been allowed to charge as much as Rs 160 for the channels that are supposed to be ‘FREE’.

    "As per the new amendments, TRAI has reduced the cap on the MRP of individual channels, which can form part of any bouquet, to Rs 12 per month, from the earlier cap of Rs 19. Less than a year ago, TRAI itself determined that the price per channel can be Rs 19, which has now been reduced to Rs 12 without giving any logical reason. Thus making the change totally arbitrary," said IBF.  

    It also said, "Over-regulation, inconsistency and frequent changes in the regulations by the regulator has already cost the broadcast sector 10-12 million TV subscribers as per various industry estimates in 2019. These amendments will compound the problem further."

  • IBF, AIDCF say STB interoperability unviable in current conditions

    IBF, AIDCF say STB interoperability unviable in current conditions

    MUMBAI:  Universal interoperability of STBs in cable and DTH is not viable in the given conditions, Indian Broadcasting Foundation (IBF) and All India Digital and Cable Federation (AIDCF) said in response to Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI)’s consultation paper on the (set top box) STB interoperability.

    Both associations suggested the authority to understand and analyse the transition of STB interoperability on the broadcasting ecosystem, with no disruption to the pay TV system before proceeding further on the consultation paper.

    The authority on 11 November had released a consultation paper on interoperable STBs for digital TV broadcasting services. It had sought comments from all stakeholders on the best solution to implement the STB interoperability.

    AIDCF brought to TRAI’s notice that DPOs and MSOs have invested a huge amount in the STB system to adapt the process of digitisation. And, any sudden change could put DPOs and MSOs in financial risk, which eventually could lead to job losses.

    The associations urged the authority to review the adherence of license conditions of the DTH operators at the field and analyse the behaviour of subscribers with respect to migration from one DTH Player to another.

    Even after the merger of Videocon and Dish TV the platforms are maintaining their separate systems and set top boxes due to no interoperability.  

    AIDCF in its comments said, around 40 million households, availing Free Dish broadcasting services, are using the non-interoperable STBs. The implementation of STB-interoperability would force subscribers to purchase new STBs while shifting to alternate service providers/DPOs.

    Similarly, investment of interoperable STBs is likely to be passed on to the subscribers, which would lead to a rise in consumer price for viewing cable services, added AIDCF.  

    Meanwhile, IBF said: “The authority, in the present consultation paper has stated that though there is de-jure technical interoperability but there is de-facto technical non-interoperability. Despite the presence of provisions relating to interoperability in the existing DTH guidelines, the concept has not yet been implemented owing primarily to the inability to provide get solutions.”

    IBF has also requested the authority to consider the preliminary submissions related to the viability of implementation of STBs: cost, safeguarding content, and no compromise on security, while contemplating any options for the implementation of STB interoperability.  

    “To proceed any further with the consultation, it would be most useful and relevant to conduct a technical and operational session to get a better understanding of the technology and possibly emerge with a proof of concept, prior to commenting on the technology and viability,” IBF suggested.

    The association believes that the introduction of STB interoperability would require a number of technological as well as operational capabilities and change thereby fostering the necessity to introduce content security provisions and anti-piracy mechanisms.

    They have also asked the authority to ensure that the expenditure incurred in acquainting the STBs with interoperability features, does not get irrationally passed on to consumers and that they are not burdened with the increased costs incurred.

    Most importantly, any regulatory provisions should be mandated after confirming viability, quality and standards of the emerging technology and should ensure that the security of the CAS, SMS and other related addressable systems of the DPOs is not compromised and is not susceptible to piracy.

    IBF also raised a concern over Embedded Common Interface (ECI), a solution considered by TRAI to achieve interoperability.

    “ECI does not meet the content security and technology needs of major content providers. ECP includes strong content security features and the ability to forensically watermark content distributed on home devices, set-top boxes, etc. ECI falls short of the ECP requirements. In particular, ECI does not require watermarking and does not create a secure location for a watermark,” IBF added.

  • Broadcasters want mandatory DD channels to be part of NCF base pack

    Broadcasters want mandatory DD channels to be part of NCF base pack

    MUMBAI: Prasar Bharati and other private broadcasters want the 25 DD mandatory channels to be part of 100 FTA channels permitted in the Network Capacity Fee of Rs 130. The public broadcaster is of the view that the channels notified by the central government should be made available to subscribers without any additional monetary burden on the subscribers.

    The public broadcaster has shared its comments only related to the question of whether 25 DD mandatory channels be over and above the One hundred channels permitted in the NCF of Rs 130 in Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI)’s consultation paper on tariff-related issue for broadcasting and cable services.

    Private broadcasters like Zee TV, Sony Entertainment Television, Discovery Communications, Times Network and IBF have shared similar views on the question raised by TRAI.

    TRAI had received several consumer complaints wherein consumers have shown concerns about the mandatory DD channels within one hundred channels. Consumers are of view that since NCF is prescribed to cater for 100 SD channels capacity, subscribers must be allowed the freedom to select 100 SD channels. Mandatory 25 channels of DD are an additional burden on the consumers. They are of the opinion that either customers should be given freedom not to choose any/all DD mandatory channels or these channels should be over and above the 100 channels selected by the subscriber.

    Therefore, the authority had asked the industry in its consultation, Whether 25 DD mandatory channels be over and above the One hundred channels permitted in the NCF of Rs. 130/-? To which Prasar Bharati commented that 25 channels notified by the central government should be available to all even if the subscribers is not able to renew its subscription still they should be able to avail public broadcasting services.

    It further said, “Since the STBs are not yet technically interoperable Prasar Bharati is of the view that in case a subscriber does not renew its subscription, the notified channel should continue to be available to such subscribers in order to benefit the subscribers to avail public broadcasting services. This will ensure dissemination of any information of national importance to the subscribers, whether his connection is active or not at that time. However, for such subscribers, any repair or maintenance charges towards customer premises equipment shall be payable by the subscriber as per rates prescribed by the operator. This will also help containing e-waste.”

    “These channels are primarily public service broadcasting channels intended to inform, educate and entertain the masses of India. In fact, the intent of the government, and rightly so, is to provide these channels of the public service broadcaster and channels of Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha to the citizens of India, free of cost, through any possible means of licensed/authorised delivery mechanism. Therefore, it is necessary that, in provisioning of these channels by various DPOs to their subscribers, no condition should be prescribed by them which affects reachability of such channels to the masses,” it opined. 

    IBF said, “It should be a part of the 100 channels. In view of the aforesaid regulatory regime already existing, it is in the best of interest of the subscribers, the authority allows the system to grow at the current existing practices and then review after a period of two years.

    Discovery Communications said, “In our opinion, the system currently introduced and in place should be continued and tested for a longer period of time. There should not be any changes made in the NCF pack even before the new regime is fully implemented. In our view, TRAI should allow the current NCF pack to continue with 25 DD channels for at least 2 years before it starts reviewing the regime again. Therefore, in our opinion, the 25 mandatory DD channels should continue to be included in the 100 FTA channels permitted in the NCF of Rs 130.”

    Times network said, “The Doordarshan channels are important channels and they should be included in the basic tier. A consumer would not mind watching these channels/ having access to these channels or paying small amount of NCF charges for the same keeping the national interest in mind.”

    Zee TV also said that the 25 DD mandatory channels should be provided to each and every subscriber by the DPO within the initial 100 channels only.