ITV

Tag: LCO

  • DAS Phase III: Govt claims 75% STB seeding; MSOs claim 50% across India

    DAS Phase III: Govt claims 75% STB seeding; MSOs claim 50% across India

    NEW DELHI: Even as the Government claimed total success in the switchover to Phase III of Cable TV Digitisation from today (1 January, 2016), there were reports from various multi system operators (MSOs) in different parts of the country who complained of shortage of set top boxes (STBs).
     
    An MSO in a city that came under Phase II in Madhya Pradesh told Indiantelevision.com that he had received frantic calls from some MSOs wanting STBs.
     
    Similarly, an LCO in Mumbai said that he had received similar calls from other parts of Maharashtra. He claimed that there was just around 50 per cent seeding across the country.
     
    The Hyderabad High Court has already extended the Digital Addressable System (DAS) deadline for two months in Andhra Pradesh and Telengana.
     
    Meanwhile, the 13th meeting of the Task Force was told on 30 December that more than 75 per cent seeding of STBs had been acomplished.
     
    Describing the progress as “very positive,” an official release today noted that seeding has taken place in most of the notified urban areas with STBs, while the seeding-dark area were only around 400 out of more than 6000 urban areas, many of which had population below 1000 while the rest were in areas having population of less than 5000. 
     
    The seeding figures as shared in the meeting indicated a high level of seeding in the country, to the extent of more than 75 per cent, excluding Tamil Nadu where certain legal matters have restricted the process of digitisation. This figure was expected to be higher when all the registered MSOs provide their final figures. 

    Broadcasters were advised to ensure that no analogue signals are transmitted in Phase III areas after 31 December but without affecting analogue signals in Phase IV areas. 

    It was unanimously decided at the meeting presided over by Special Secretary J S Mathur that looking to the positive outcome of the Digitisation Phase III exercise and the fact that the notification for the cut-off date for phase III was issued more than a year ago, there was absolutely no requirement for extension of the cut-off date. 

     
    The Task Force, where Joint Secretary (Broadcasting) R Jaya and Adviser Yogendra Pal were present, noted that various awareness campaigns, Task Force and MSO sub-group meetings and orientation workshops for the state and district Nodal officers have been held during this period. A multilingual toll free helpline (1800 180 4343) has also been made operational.
  • “Our strategy is clear, we are ready to associate with everybody but we won’t compromise with our transparency:” Tony D’Silva

    “Our strategy is clear, we are ready to associate with everybody but we won’t compromise with our transparency:” Tony D’Silva

    For Hinduja’s Headend In The Sky (HITS) platform – NXT Digital, which was launched earlier this year, the journey so far has been about tussling it out. From procuring the requisite license from the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting (MIB) to getting broadcasters on board, for NXT Digital, it was no mean feat. Focusing on phase III and IV areas of Digital Addressable System (DAS), the venture has made it very clear that they mean business and are here for the long haul.

    Led by Grant Investrade managing director Tony D’Silva, the venture is investing heavily in order to achieve the goals that have been set. With an aim to spread its network pan India, NXT Digital has deployed teams on ground to reach out to operators. Speaking to Indiantelevision.com’s Anirban Roy Choudhury, D’Silva speaks about the roadmap ahead for NXT Digital, the recent deal with Zee Entertainment Enterprises as well as India’s cable digitisation drive. D’silva makes no bones about the fact that the company is ready to associate with anybody but will not compromise with its transparency.

    Read on:

    How did the industry respond to the launch of NXT Digital?

    The launch of NXT Digital has been very well received by most markets across the country. Initially people were skeptical about what this system was all about. There was a lot of negative publicity in the market spread by people with various vested interests saying that we would face the same problems that Jain HITS faced. I think we have been able to overcome that gradually. And now we believe that we are a platform to stay. We have made substantial investment and have the financial support to invest more.

    What do you think has been the biggest achievement so far for NXT Digital?

    The most important achievement is the fact that we have successfully signed all the broadcasters. The deal with broadcasters is for both active and passive services (with exception of Zee), which is a greater achievement. Now I think we have started to move faster. Initially the progress was a little slow because there was a lot of confusion in the market as what will be the last date of DAS Phase III. However, now that there is clarity on the final date, the demand has seen a substantial growth in terms of COPE mini headend systems and set top boxes (STBs).

    When you speak about demand, is there any particular region where you are witnessing the demand or is it pan India?

    It is indeed pan India. In fact, we are observing a huge demand in phase I and II areas. But considering our decision to not disturb the existing ecosystem, we have decided to focus on phase III and IV markets only as of now. That said, we will review the model whenever needed.

    How robust is your infrastructure to meet the growing demand?

    We built our infrastructure for a particular demand but we have gone well beyond that demand and hence we have to now re-build our infrastructure. And that’s exactly what we will do to meet the demand.

    Infrastructure will certainly not be a problem as far as NXT Digital is concerned. We are evaluating various options when it comes to STBs. DAS Phase IV will have a different affording power as compared to phase III and keeping the diversity in mind, we plan to offer a variety of options when it comes to STBs. By next year we will add one or two more transponders too.

    How do you plan to ensure cordial reach out to the operators?

    We reach out to the operators through various print, digital mediums, live roadshows etc. Moreover we have an on-ground team, which interacts with the operators. I think the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Once cable operators as well as the market have seen our services, there will automatically be a level of satisfaction and confidence and then they will be our ambassadors.

    What’s your take on pricing when it comes to DAS Phase III and IV?

    The content pricing is a function of broadcasters. We follow a business model where we don’t make any money from content. We don’t want to make money from content. The lower the broadcaster gives us, the lower we offer to our operators. Broadcasters unfortunately don’t see a difference between Phase III and Phase IV even though we have been repeatedly appealing to them because there is a clear difference in Average Revenue Per User (ARPU) in the two regions. I think it’s the function of authority overseeing the digitisation process to ensure the fact that the price quoted is fair for the entire ecosystem.

    Is there a clear enough revenue model?

    I think there should be a differentiation in the markets, or another way to look at it is to see what you can afford and pay for it. But I don’t know if the second one is a right option at this stage. And the reason I say at this stage is because the consumer is used to a kind of model and suddenly you cannot give him another rationale and logic. The transition needs to happen after following a logical approach and that is something that I firmly believe in. You cannot bring in a change by being harsh on the end consumers. 

    How many operators has NXT Digital signed with so far? Are you happy with the number?

    We are very close to touching the 500 mark and I am very happy with the number. The number will go up substantially as we come closer and closer to the D-Day. There are a huge number of people who are still trying to figure out the best way forward. The main reason why operators held back was because they were insecure about us not having all the content. After getting Zee on board that problem has been addressed and now we will certainly see the demand going up.

    The other problem that we faced in the initial stages was our broadcaster friends campaigning against us. They went on to many operators and mis-informed them saying NXT Digital will also be on the same track as Jain HITS as we will not provide them the content. I think we have proved that these were just rumours and hence they don’t count anymore.

    What’s your take on the entire digitisation process?

    Not all operators are equipped with higher education and hence they do not understand the actual meaning of digitisation. Digitisation does not mean putting a digital head-end and STBs but it is also about managing the backend, packaging and bundling. On the other hand, there are a lot of smart, intelligent Chinese vendors all around laying the trap and there are a good number of operators falling in that trap maybe because of the government pressure or lack of understanding.

    The other thing I have been telling the government is that when you look at regulation per se, the entire onus of implementing digitisation lies on the MSO. However, we are forgetting that a very important part of the process is the local cable operator (LCO), who is delivering the signal to the end consumer. Therefore billing, receipt collection, ensuring quality, consciousness and other on-ground responsibilities should remain with the LCO.

    The government needs to understand that unlike many other countries, India is not a homogenous market. On a single street you will find slums and multi-storeyed apartments, which are both are consuming content. The LCO cannot go with a fixed price because it will be more than some or less than some. Moreover, he will also have to pay service tax on it. The concept of billing needs to be realistic and practical. There are a lot of things that need to be addressed if we really want to digitise the country. 

    You are also providing local channel facility, which is something that lacks on DTH. Who takes the responsibility of the content put on those channels?

    We have a mechanism through which operators can have as many as eight – sixteen local channels. The benefit is that they are all encrypted and hence piracy is taken care of. We are clear with the operator that whatever content is put up, should follow the Cable Act. If the operator airs pirated content or breaches the law, the broadcasters can inform us and we will switch off signals. We have the power to switch off, which other MSOs don’t and that’s another advantage that we have. We have to understand one thing that the COPE belongs solely to the operator and therefore the liability of whatever is inserted through that COPE is on him. 

    Can DD Freedish capitalise on the on-ground chaos? If there is a blackout, people may just move to DD Freedish?

    DD Freedish is also like any other DTH platform. I don’t think it meets consumer requirements. The consumer knows what he wants to watch. Setting up a DD Freedish and buying an STB is similar investment. It’s just that there is no subscription fee attached to DD Freedish but it has its limitations when it comes to number of channels. And not only channels, the exposure that we offer is far beyond, be it international with global channels, local channels or value added services. So we are far ahead of a platform like DD Freedish and we are not bothered by it.

    You had all major broadcasters on board except Zee. How was your experience inking the deal with Zee?

    A deal that took four months to be signed cannot be called a smooth one. We went to the MIB, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) and then eventually tussled it out at the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT). For many years now we have been requesting TRAI to come up with a standard Interconnect Agreement (ICA). There are so many operators across the country who cannot even afford to go to the TDSAT. It’s not an easy process; he has to come to Delhi, hire a lawyer and it needs a lot of financial backup. The deal signing with Zee was a learning experience for me. It was a case of dealing with people who say something and do something totally different. It was a clear case of mis-interpretation of law.

    What is the way forward for NXT Digital?

    Value added services are important to ensure growth and now we are focusing aggressively on that front. I want to make one thing very clear, which is that the Hinduja Group will fight this till the very end. We are not going to be tempered over by anybody in this industry. If there is a genuine problem or concern, we are more than happy to sit and discuss. At the same time, no matter what, we will not be stepped on for nothing. I firmly believe that the whole is always bigger than the individual. If we have all the broadcasters with us and one against, there has to be some vested interest. Our strategy is clear, we are ready to associate with everybody for business or betterment of the industry but we won’t compromise with our transparency. 

  • Tamil Nadu cable TV industry incurs Rs 25 crore loss due to floods

    Tamil Nadu cable TV industry incurs Rs 25 crore loss due to floods

    MUMBAI: ’Twas Mother Nature’s fury at full throttle when the state of Tamil Nadu was flooded by the heaviest rainfall it has been privy to in the last century. Many lives were lost even as over three lakh people became homeless.

     

    While the southern state is slowly inching back to normalcy from the unprecedented rains and floods, which engulfed whatever came in its way, the natural disaster had a massive impact on the media and entertainment industry as well. The entire cable TV ecosystem was brutally affected by the calamity. It may be recalled that for the last couple of weeks, the Broadcast Audience Research Council (BARC) India hasn’t received television ratings data from the region too.

     

    In the light of this disaster, a senior cable federation member from Chennai estimates the overall loss suffered by the cable industry to be close to Rs 25 crore. “We have done an on-ground survey and after a thorough analysis, we came to the estimate. Local cable operators (LCOs) will have to bear the majority of the loss as most of the fibre amplifier devices, which were damaged belong to them,” he adds.

     

    While industry body ASSOCHAM estimated the overall financial loss from the torrential rains and floods in Tamil Nadu to be in excess of Rs 15,000 crore, the Rs 25 crore loss to the cable industry may even be a conservative one. The on-ground reality indeed paints a grim picture.

     

    “Thousands of fibre amplifiers got affected. The LCOs are trying their level best to restore services but the damage is so massive that it will take at least a week or 10 days more to get things back on track,” added a senior official from the cable fraternity.

     

    A fibre amplifier, which is located in the operating room of cable operators, costs around Rs 3500 and a large number of them were totally destroyed as they immersed in the flood water. Fortunately, no instance of head-end damaged could be traced.

     

    An independent multi system operator (MSO), who was also affected by the natural calamity, said, “The head-ends are generally placed at a good height and hence they got saved. But my transmitter is totally damaged. The flood has damaged cable operations brutally, and to restore services it will take me more than 15 days at least.”

     

    “The transmitter costs Rs 50,000 and I have to invest in a new one,” he adds.

     

    The other equipment that was damaged in the flood and needs serious investment is Erbium Doped Fiber Amplifier (EDFA), which is an optical repeater device used to boost the intensity of optical signals being carried through a fiber optic communications system. “I need to invest Rs 1.5 lakh in my EDFA and there are many other such operators who will have to change their EDFA,” said an LCO.

     

    While some equipments may be under warranty, it is unlikely that the warranty applies in the case of natural disasters. A looming question is also that of insurance. All said and done, many LCOs and MSOs affected severely by the flood will have to bend over backwards in order to get their system back on.

  • TDSAT asks Star India to restore signals to Karnataka LCO subject to part payment

    TDSAT asks Star India to restore signals to Karnataka LCO subject to part payment

    NEW DELHI: Star India has been asked by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) to restore signals to Karnataka based local cable operator (LCO) V4 Media, provided it pays Rs 12.91 lakh through RTGS as committed by it.

     

    Listing the matter for 21 December, the Tribunal said V4 Media will further make payment of Rs 19.88 lakh by 26 December.

     

    TDSAT chairman Justice Aftab Alam and member B B Srivastava made it clear that “these payments are on account payment and shall be without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties.”

     

    Apart from the aforesaid payments, V4 Media will also pay the monthly subscription fee as per the invoice dated 5 November.

  • TDSAT rejects IndiaCast, MSM Discovery, Asianet petitions claiming dues from LCOs

    TDSAT rejects IndiaCast, MSM Discovery, Asianet petitions claiming dues from LCOs

    NEW DELHI: Sending out a clear signal to distributors and multi system operators (MSOs), the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) has once again turned down three petitions seeking payment from a local cable operator (LCO) for the period for which the signals were sent even after expiry of a valid interconnect agreement.

     

    There were two cases of IndiaCast UTV Media Distribution and MSM Discovery against MSO S R Cable TV and one by Asianet Satellite Communication against Sathyadhara Communications.

     

    The cases against S R Cable were for recovery of the alleged dues of subscription fees amounting to Rs 3.01 lakh along with interest at 18 per cent and Rs 8.24 lakh along with interest at 18 per cent per annum respectively till the date of payment.

     

    The case of Asianet was for recovery of Rs 1.30 crore allegedly payable by Sathyadhara towards balance of carriage fees for the year 2012-13 and a further sum of Rs 20.47 lakh as interest at 18 per cent p.a. for the delay in payment of the carriage fees.

     

    TDSAT chairman Justice Aftab Alam and member Kuldip Singh said, “The alleged supply of signals by IndiaCast to the respondent after the expiry of the interconnect agreement was plainly in contravention of the statutory Regulations. Having acted in breach of the Regulations, it cannot seek the help of the judicial process and realise its dues through the process of court.”

     

    The petitions against S R Cable were dismissed with cost of Rs 5,000 payable to the TDSAT Employees Welfare Society.

     

    It was in the case of IndiaCast that the LCO executed an interconnect agreement with it on 1 June, 2011 for the period 1 April, 2011 to 31 March under which IndiaCast was to supply the TV channels controlled by it on behalf of its principal broadcasters on payment of Rs 21 lakh as the monthly subscription fee.

     

    IndiaCast said it supplied the TV channels to the LCO in terms of the agreement and regularly raised invoices for payment of the monthly subscription fee. The LCO, however, defaulted in payments as a result of which dues accumulated. Finally on 1 August, 2014 IndiaCast discontinued the supply of its signals to the respondent.

     

    IndiaCast claimed it sent reminders and legal notice demanding the payment of its dues but as no payment was made by the LCO, the petition was filed on 5 August, 2014.

     

    TDSAT proceeded ex parte as the LCO did not appear despite service of notice.

     

    The Tribunal took note of the fact that IndiaCast had sought to fill this gap by a miscellaneous application on 23 February this year by stating that the LCO was required to pay an amount of Rs 25.20 lakh exclusive of taxes annually towards the subscription fee calculated on the basis of the said Subscription Agreement for 12 months, but the LCO on several occasions requested IndiaCast to continue to provide the signals even after the expiry of the previous agreement and gave the oral assurances that the fresh agreements will be executed between the parties. It is stated that “the parties were negotiating for the renewal of the agreement and basis the negotiation process, the petitioner continued to provide the signals.”

     

    The Tribunal rejected as “misconceived” the arguments sought to be raised to the effect that the LCO was bound by law and was liable under Section 73 of the Indian Contract Act 1872 as they cannot apply to the present case.

     

    Similarly, the Tribunal said the amendments made early this year do not help it.

     

    “IndiaCast would indeed be entitled to recover any dues pertaining to the period of the agreement that came to end on 31 March, 2012 but it is not the case that the dues pertain to that period nor from the statement of account it is discernible whether or not there were any dues on the date the agreement came to end,” the Tribunal noted.

     

    It added that clause 8 of the Telecommunication (Broadcasting and Cable Services) Interconnection Regulations 2004 (Regulations) provides for the maximum period of three months for negotiations for renewal of existing agreements and clause 4A (introduced in the Regulations with effect from 17 March, 2009 prohibits a broadcaster or a distributor of TV channels to make available signals of TV channels to any distributor without entering into a written interconnect agreement.”

     

    In the MSM petition, the interconnect agreement was for the period 1 January, 2011 to 31 December, 2011 under which MSM was to supply the TV channels controlled by it on behalf of its principal broadcasters on payment of Rs 1.25 lakh as the monthly subscription fee. MSM said it supplied the TV channels to the MSO and regularly raised invoices for payment of the monthly subscription fee. The MSO defaulted in payments as a result of which dues accumulated. Finally on 17 December, 2012 MSM discontinued the supply of its signals to the respondent.

     

    In the Asianet case, a carriage agreement dated 8 August, 2011 was signed between the parties for one year from 1 September, 2011 to 31 August, 2012 to carry and retransmit signals of Darshana TV channel of the respondent for an amount of Rs 60 lakh per year exclusive of taxes. The dispute pertains to a period starting from 1 September, 2012 till the disconnection of carriage of signals by the respondent on 20 November, 2013.

  • MSOs, LCOs upbeat about Hinduja’s NXT Digital HITS platform

    MSOs, LCOs upbeat about Hinduja’s NXT Digital HITS platform

    MUMBAI: The Indian television industry is bracing itself for the third phase of digitisation as the deadline for Digital Addressable System (DAS) ends on 31 December, 2015.

    Phase III deadline of digitisation is what the broadcast ecosystem has been talking for a year now. While on the one hand, the government of India has time and again made it clear that there will be no extension of deadline, which is 31 December, 2015, on the other, stakeholders are pointing fingers at the system as the teething issues like inter-connect agreement (ICA), CPS deals et al are yet to be taken care of. In a recent notice the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) headed by Arun Jaitley and MoS RajyavardhanSingh Rathore, has asked broadcasters to stop beaming analogue signals to all MSOs. Now with only days to go, people are still unclear as to what’s ahead.

    Amidst the chaos of litigations between stakeholders and various pot-shots being fired, Hinduja’s Headend In The Sky (HITS) platform NXT Digital found its calm in doing actual ground work before launch.

    Harvard Business School professor Rosabeth Moss Kanter once said, “Leaders must pick causes they won’t abandon easily, remain committed despite setbacks, and communicate their big ideas over and over again in every encounter.” And that’s exactly what the team helming NXT Digital did. Prior to its launch on 16 September, the HITS platform carried out road shows involving Last Mile Operators (LMOs) in over 19 cities spread across the length and breadth of the country to communicate the new idea.

    While the initial reactions from the operators weren’t that encouraging, the lack of collaboration on-ground between existing MSOs and LCOs turned out to be a blessing in disguise for NXT Digital, which in turn fuelled its penetration into the hinterland. Now, MSOs and LCOs that Indiantelevision.com spoke to are upbeat about the new platform.

    An independent MSO from the North Eastern Province tells Indiantelevision.com, “I recently invested Rs 50 lakh to establish a cable head-end but as of now I don’t know how much I will be charging the consumers. The Cost Per Subscriber (CPS) model is not even talked about yet. Broadcasters are giving out different deals to different MSOs. If anybody asks me for a suggestion, I would tell them to go for HITS as it is a much more transparent platform.”

    Another impeding problem that the industry will soon face is a serious crisis of Set-Top-Boxes (STBs). While the boxes are assembled in India, the components are still being shipped from China. “The components have not yet been ordered. While a few have placed the first round of orders, there are many who are yet to do that. It takes three months for the components to be delivered from China and then an additional one month to assemble them. So it is certain that the boxes will not reach on time. The STB crisis will be there for NXT Digital too,” said a senior official of an established MSO.

    However, NXT Digital is unperturbed. A senior official of the company says, “There was going to be a set-top box crisis and we always knew about it. Hence we placed an order for four million boxes and there are close to 1.1 million boxes available for us at this stage. So NXT Digital is pretty sorted from the STB point of view.”

    If sources are to be believed, Star is charging Rs 38 for its bouquet in DAS Phase III areas, whereas the Zee bouquet costs close to Rs 30. Sony Pictures Networks India (erstwhile Multi Screen Media) is pricing its bouquet at Rs 24, while India Cast is charging Rs 20.

    On the other hand, NXT Digital is charging Rs 71 per box. “It’s a good deal. It’s just that they don’t have Zee in their package yet. But I don’t think it will take long for them to get them in,” says a reputed member of a Southern cable federation. “They are giving a total of over 300 channels and if there is a spike in demand, they have the infrastructure to meet it too. So it’s a good long term investment.”

    NXT Digital follows a prepaid model, which the Indian ecosystem is not yet used to. “That’s not really a big issue; people usually get used to it. I am getting a lot of positive feedback from the industry about the HITS platform. However, there’s one thing that I will request Mr Tony to look at and that is the exchange of STBs. People are not ready to forget the STB investment that they have already made to have one. If they give an exchange offer, it would be great for us,” opines an LMO.

    Now it remains to be seen how NXT Digital proceeds further and to what extend they succeed in capitalising the hinterlands.

  • TDSAT directs 65 Rajasthan LCOs to make payment to Hathway

    TDSAT directs 65 Rajasthan LCOs to make payment to Hathway

    NEW DELHI: Accepting the request on behalf of 65 Rajasthan cable operators about their dues to Hathway Cable & Datacom Ltd. Jaipur, the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) has said that these payments are ad hoc in nature and without prejudice to the rights and contentions of either side and will abide by the final decision in the petition.

     

    The petition had been filed by Rajasthan Cable Operators Foundation, Jaipur, on behalf of the local cable operators (LCOs).

     

    Following a previous order and as an ad hoc arrangement, Hathway counsel Jayant K  Mehta gave a computation with regard to the monthly subscription fee payable for the months of August and September 2015 by each of the 65 LCOs being represented in this petition.

     

    Foundation counsel G S Oberoi said the LCOs will “certainly” make payment on the basis of the computation given on behalf of Hathway. 

     

    However, he submitted that the payment of the dues for the aforesaid two months may be split up into two instalments. He said half of the dues for the two months will be paid by the LCOs along with the payment for the month of December and the balance along with the payment for the month January 2016. 

     

    The Tribunal listed the matter on 22 December before the Assistant Registrar for getting the pleadings completed, framing of issues and taking evidences.

  • TRAI‘s Draft of interconnect agreement out; seeks counter-comments by Jan 7

    TRAI‘s Draft of interconnect agreement out; seeks counter-comments by Jan 7

    New Delhi: With an aim of reducing disputes and because the regulations for pacts between multisystem operators and local cable operators can only be entered into on the basis of interconnect agreements, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI )today issued a draft Model and Standard Interconnection Agreement for offering cable TV services through Digital Addressable Systems (DAS) .

     

    Stakeholders have been asked to give their comments and counter-comments on the draft latest by 31 December and 7 January respectively.

     

    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 as 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 the various parts of the country between January and October this year, with the objective of enhancing awareness about the regulatory framework among stakeholders and to assess the compliance of the regulatory framework.

     

    During these interactions, the stakeholders raised the issue that the terms and conditions of the agreement offered by the MSO were one sided and do not provide a level playing field to the LCOs. Often the obligation of both the parties for meeting the quality of service norms prescribed in the QoS regulation was not clearly defined in the interconnection agreement and due to which, in the event of dispute between the MSO and the LCO, the quality of service was adversely affected.

     

    The existing regulation and tariff orders applicable for DAS may also require suitable amendments to incorporate necessary provisions relating to Model and Standard Interconnection Agreements between the MSO and the LCO, TRAI said in a consultation paper.

     

    The Model and Standard Interconnection Agreements contains mandatory provisions to ensure the compliance of the regulatory framework available for DAS. The proposed draft consists of a Model Interconnection Agreement (MIA) and Standard Interconnection agreements (SIA) in a single document, namely draft model and standard interconnection agreements.

     

    The draft contains necessary terms and conditions, to ensure the compliance of the regulatory framework available for DAS, and to provide a level playing field to the MSOs and the LCOs. The draft agreement also lists roles and responsibilities as well as rights and obligations of each party separately.

     

    While notifying the regulatory framework in 2012, TRAI did not formulate SIA and left it to market forces as there could be various relationship models between the MSOs and the LCOs. It was envisaged that this would provide enough flexibility to the stakeholders while transitioning from analogue un-addressable systems to digital addressable systems.

     

    .

     

    In cases where the revenue settlement was mutually agreed between the MSO and the LCO, the MIA part of the draft agreement would be applicable. In other cases where the revenue settlement could not be agreed mutually between the MSO and the LCO; and it wasdecided to continue relationship based on the fall back subscription revenue share arrangement as prescribed in the tariff order, the SIA part of the draft agreement would be applicable. 

     

    Apart from clauses 10 to 12 of the proposed draft agreement, which relate to roles and responsibilities of the MSOs and the LCOs, billing, and revenue settlement, other clauses would remain same in the final Model and Standard Interconnection Agreement.

     

    In clause 10 of the proposed draft agreement, some of the roles have been clubbed together to assign common responsibility of these roles either to the MSO or to the LCO. Splitting of these roles may cause inconsistencies and gaps in delivery of satisfactory services to the consumers. However at consultation stage, the stakeholders can provide their valuable comments on re-grouping of roles, if felt necessary, with justifications.

     

    In case of the SIA, the responsibilities for various roles shall be fixed as per column 4 of the clause 10 of this draft agreement after considering the comments of the stakeholders. Similarly the billing and revenue settlement responsibilities shall also be fixed as per clause 11 and 12 respectively of this draft agreement after considering the comments of the stakeholders. Accordingly, all the terms and conditions of SIA which include the revenue share settlement conditions also, shall be standardised after prescription of SIA. No additions, deletions, and or alteration would be permitted thereafter in SIA terms and conditions.

     

    In the case of the MIA, the responsibilities for various roles to be finalised in clause 10 of this draft agreement, can be mutually agreed by the parties and recorded in writing in the column 3 of clause 10 of this draft agreement. In this case, column 4 of the clause 10 of this draft agreement would not be applicable. Similarly the billing and revenue settlement responsibilities shall also be agreed mutually as per clause 11 and 12 of this draft agreement respectively and recorded in writing in the agreement. No deletions, and/or alteration would be permitted thereafter in MIA terms and conditions. However, the parties, through mutual agreement, may add certain additional terms and conditions subject to such terms and conditions do not dilute, override, and or alter the existing terms and conditions. In case of any conflict between the existing terms and conditions of the prescribed MIA, and new terms and conditions added through mutual agreement by the parties; the existing terms and conditions of the prescribed MIA shall prevail.

     

     

  • TDSAT appoints advocate commissioner to examine subscription claims of Chirala MSO

    TDSAT appoints advocate commissioner to examine subscription claims of Chirala MSO

    NEW DELHI: An Advocate Commissioner has been appointed by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) to carry out a sample survey of the SLRs of Chirala Cable Network, which is seeking signals of Taj TV, Eenadu TV, Maa TV and Sun Distribution Services.

     

    The Tribunal said Advocate Commissioner Tushar Singh would go on a date duly intimated to all concerned to Chirala town and its rural areas where the multi system operator (MSO) claims it has subscribers. All the parties may nominate their representative to accompany the Advocate Commissioner in course of the survey. 

     

    Singh will go to all panchayat areas named in the SLR submitted by the petitioner. In each area he will visit at least 10 houses named in the SLR and 10 houses outside the SLR to verify whether any one of them are the petitioner’s subscribers or they are taking their signals from some other MSO/LCO. 

     

    Listing the matter for 4 January, the Advocate Commissioner was asked to submit a report within three weeks and he will be paid, apart from actual expenses, an honorarium of Rs 30,000 per day.

     

    The order came on a petition by the MSO wanting the signals of the four respondents against whom it has filed these four petitions. The petitioner is operating in Chirala town and adjoining rural areas. The controversy between the parties is mainly in regard to the petitioner’s SLR in rural areas, adjoining Chirala town.

     

    The Tribunal noted that Chirala town falls under Phase III of the DAS regime and the rural areas adjoining it come under Phase IV. In Chirala town, the petitioner is getting Sun’s signals through A.C.T Digital. 

     

    During the proceedings, the petitioner filed two or three SLRs, which on verification by Sun are said to have been found incorrect. According to Sun, the petitioner does not have any subscriber in the rural areas around Chirala town and it is making an attempt to penetrate the rural areas on the basis of incorrect SLRs “which would make it very difficult for the broadcasters to raise their invoices.”

     

    The Tribunal also noted that the petitioner had once again filed a fat affidavit giving its latest SLRs according to which it has 3219 subscribers of which 1138 are in Chirala town and the rest in the rural areas.

     

    The ascertainment that the correct SLRs that should form the basis for determining the licence fee payable by the petitioner to the broadcasters is an issue of facts, which may be determined on the basis of evidences led by the parties.

  • TDSAT permits LCO to seek TV signals directly from distributor

    TDSAT permits LCO to seek TV signals directly from distributor

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) has said that SRE Digital Cable Communications is entitled in law to ask Sun TV for supply of signals directly despite the fact that it has been receiving these signals from another multi system operator (MSO).

     

    TDSAT chairman Aftab Alam and members Kuldip Singh and B B Srivastava said however that this is subject to the operator satisfying the conditions mandated in the Regulations.

     

    Listing the matter for 21 December, the Tribunal said, “It will be open to Sun Distribution Services Pvt Ltd to make an inspection of the LCO’s system and to be satisfied that it is compliant with the regulatory norms.”

     

    On the next date, the LCO’s counsel Sujeet Kumar Mishra will also produce the invoices of A.C.T. Digital with the materials showing that payments are duly made against those invoices.

          

    The Tribunal also noted that the area in which the petitioner is operating is to come under the DAS regime in the third phase from 1 January, 2016. “It is, therefore, reasonable to assume that the petitioner would have a digital head-end in place. As a matter of fact, Mr. Mishra states that such is the position and the petitioner is capable of retransmitting any signals, including those received from SUN in digital mode.”

     

    However, it said that Sun could not be denied the request to examine the systems.

     

    In pursuance of the order passed on 29 October, Sun counsel Abhishek Malhotra filed an affidavit stating that the petitioner is receiving Sun’s signals from A.C.T. Digital. 

     

    Mishra admitted to the Tribunal that the petitioner had been receiving Sun’s signals from A.C.T. Digital from the month of November 2015. “Evidently, the earlier statements made on behalf of the petitioner were not correct,” the Tribunal noted.