I&B Ministry
CAS: Government to revert to Delhi HC next week
NEW DELHI: The government is likely to revert to the Delhi High Court with a status report on CAS’ rollout early next week even as the Indian Broadcasting Foundation (IBF) has raised several queries on addressability’s efficacy.
“A senior official of the information and broadcasting ministry admitted that it has to go back to the court with a feedback on CAS, but said it’s timing is still not clear.
“One month for us would be calculated from the day we received a certified copy of the court order. As on 10 March, a verbal order was passed,” the official said.
Still, the official also added that the court would have to be apprised of
the progress on CAS front and “it would be done.” With diverse signals emanating from the industry stakeholders, the government is slightly confused, the official said.
However, the deluge of facts and figures relating to CAS and various time lines proposed by stakeholders also gives the government some breathing space.
On 10 March, the Delhi High Court directed the government to implement CAS in Kolkata, Delhi and Mumbai within a month’s time. The judgment came on a petition filed by some MSOs, including INCablenet and Hathway.
While a large section of the cable fraternity has been pushing for quick
implementation of CAS, a section of broadcasters and consumer organisations want a certain comfort level before CAS is rolled out.
IBF AGAINST PRICE CONTROL UNDER CAS
Meanwhile, the IBF in a submission to the government has said that there should not be any price control in a CAS-enabled regime and the issue of piracy should be addressed as a priority.
“Under the Trai (sector regulator) recommendations to government for CAS implementation, presented on 1 October, 2004, it was recommended that there should be no price control in addressable markets. In view of this, we believe that for CAS notified areas, there should be no price fixation,” the IBF letter states setting the cat amongst the pigeons (read the cable operators).
The letter, a copy of which is available with Indiantelevision.com, drops broad hints that pay broadcasters would not give a la carte price for consumers — something that has been in demand for over a year now during confabulations on CAS.
“Broadcasters are whole sellers to cable operators as the consumer price for cable TV is fixed by the operators,” IBF has said, adding all pending litigations and outstanding dues involving the cable industry must be resolved before CAS is rolled out.
Hinting that the claims of MSOs and cable ops on availability of set-top boxes might be exaggerated, the IBF goes on to state that effective steps should be taken to ensure that in the notified areas, adequate number of boxes is available with MSOs and last mile operators to cater to the demand.
“There should be no instance that consumers want to install STBs and
MSOs/LCOs are unable to provide them. MSOs/LCOs would also need to ensure that there is proper coordination between them and their LCOs. The MSOs/LCOs should provide a detailed STB implementation plan,” the IBF letter says.
The broadcasters have also urged the government to ban carriage fee, which is demanded by cable operators and also given by most major broadcasters whether free to air or pay.
“The IBF members are of the view that the government should make sure that cable operators not demand carriage fee from the broadcasters… in view of the fact that they collect subscription revenue from the subscribers,” the letter states.
Another point raised by the IBF is that since CAS is being mandated by the government, unlike in other countries where market forces bring about its rollout, other addressable systems like DTH, IPTV and broadband should also be similarly mandated to create “a level playing field” for those platforms.
I&B Ministry
India turns up the heat on piracy, orders Telegram to axe 3,142 channels and blocks 800 websites
New legal teeth, nodal officers and notices to intermediaries signal that the government is done playing nice with copyright thieves
NEW DELHI: India’s war on film piracy just got significantly more aggressive. The government has ordered Telegram to remove 3,142 channels distributing pirated content, blocked access to around 800 websites through internet service providers, and put the full weight of freshly sharpened legislation behind the crackdown. The message from New Delhi is unambiguous: the free ride for copyright thieves is over.
Minister of state for information and broadcasting L. Murugan spelled out the legal architecture to the Lok Sabha on Wednesday. The Cinematograph (Amendment) Act, 2023, he said, now contains specific provisions designed to make piracy a genuinely painful proposition. Sections 6AA and 6AB prohibit unauthorised recording and transmission of films, with violations attracting a minimum of three months’ imprisonment and a fine of Rs 3 lakh. At the upper end, offenders face three years behind bars and fines of up to 5 per cent of a film’s audited gross production cost — a figure that, for a big-budget production, could run into crores.
The legislation also gives the government powers to act against intermediaries hosting infringing content, by notifying them under Section 79(3) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, and compelling takedowns and blocking actions. Under Section 79(3)(b), intermediaries are legally required to remove or disable access to unlawful content upon receiving government notice or court orders. The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, add a further layer of obligation, requiring platforms to ensure their services are not used to host or distribute content that violates copyright or proprietary rights.
To put enforcement into practice, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting has established a dedicated institutional mechanism, complete with nodal officers to receive complaints. Copyright holders, authorised representatives or individuals can report piracy through a prescribed format, after which the government issues notices to intermediaries to disable access to infringing links.
The most headline-grabbing action came on 11 March 2026, when Telegram was formally notified under Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act and directed to remove and disable 3,142 channels found to be distributing unauthorised content belonging to OTT platforms, content owners and producers. The complaints that triggered the action came from OTT platforms including JioCinema and Amazon Prime Video, which alleged that copyrighted films, web series and other material were being shared on the platform on a massive scale. Telegram’s architecture, with its large file-sharing limits and capacity for user anonymity, has made it a favoured vehicle for exactly this kind of large-scale piracy.
The Telegram action sits within a broader pattern of escalating enforcement. Just days before the Lok Sabha statement, the ministry banned five OTT platforms for streaming obscene content: MoodXVIP, Koyal Playpro, Digi Movieplex, Feel and Jugnu. In July 2025, the Centre ordered the blocking of 25 OTT platforms accused of streaming obscene, vulgar or pornographic material, a list that included ALTT, ULLU, Big Shots App, Desiflix, Boomex, Navarasa Lite, Gulab App, Kangan App, Bull App, Jalva App, ShowHit, Wow Entertainment, Look Entertainment, Hitprime, Feneo, ShowX, Sol Talkies, Adda TV, HotX VIP, Hulchul App, MoodX, NeonX VIP, Fugi, Mojflix and Triflicks.
Rule 3(1)(b) of the IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, provides the regulatory hook for those actions, prohibiting platforms from hosting content that is obscene, pornographic, invasive of privacy, gender-harassing, racially or ethnically objectionable, or that promotes hatred and violence.
For an industry that loses billions of rupees annually to piracy, the direction of travel is welcome. The question, as always, is not whether the laws exist, but whether the enforcement machinery can keep pace with the ingenuity of those determined to circumvent it. Three thousand channels down, and the pirates are already busy opening three thousand more.
