High Court
Commercial TV subscriber tariffs: Broadcasters, Star take battle to courts
MUMBAI: It’s the battle of the bill – the commercial cable TV bill, that is. The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) on 16 July 2014 issued an amendment to its earlier 2004 broadcasting and cable TV tariff order. The amendment brought in new customer categories such as commercial establishments and commercial subscribers. And it also stated that as far as cable TV rates are concerned, there shouldn’t be any differentiation on an ordinary and commercial subscriber and charges for both should be on a per TV set basis.
That amendment has not gone down well with the Indian broadcast community as they have been lobbying for differential rates for commercial subscribers for a long time and the global practice is that commercial establishment and subscribers pay more than common subscribers.
Its representative body, the Indian Broadcasting Federation (IBF) decided to challenge the tariff order for non-digital addressable areas (DAS) in the Telecom Disputes Settlement Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT). And industry leader Star India decided to file a writ petition against the TRAI challenging the order for both non DAS and DAS and other addressable systems in the Delhi High Court.
Coincidentally both the cases came up for hearing on the same day. While the HC declined to give a stay order on the 16 July 2014 tariff order amendment, it has served notices to both the TRAI and the Federation of Hotels and Restaurants Association of India (FHRAI).
The matter has been posted for a full-fledged hearing on 26 September. Till then, the order is maintainable. Meanwhile, the TDSAT has said that it will wait till the HC decides on the case to take any further action.
What Star India has challenged in the HC is that the 16 July 2014 amendment order denies broadcasters the right to directly deal with the hotels. Star India has also appealed that it will have to unnecessarily depend on distribution platform operators DPOs to strike content deals as for commercial establishments, which might be treated as ordinary subscribers unless they specifically charge customers for cable TV subscribers. The broadcaster can only give a differentiated rate to those hotels that categorically mention TV as one of the services, thereby being deeming it fit to be called a commercial subscriber.
The TRAI and FHRAI have been asked to respond to notices by the next hearing.
High Court
Delhi HC blocks illegal IPL 2026 streams, backs JioStar rights
Court orders swift takedowns, expands crackdown on piracy apps
NEW DELHI: In a timely move ahead of the cricketing season, the Delhi High Court has granted interim relief to JioStar India Private Limited, clamping down on illegal streaming of the TATA Indian Premier League 2026.
The court passed ex parte ad interim injunctions in two separate suits, restraining rogue websites and mobile applications from broadcasting IPL matches without authorisation. The tournament is set to begin on 28 March, making the timing of the order particularly significant.
Recognising JioStar’s exclusive digital and broadcast rights for the IPL cycle from 2023 to 2027, the court observed that unauthorised streaming would infringe its statutory and proprietary rights, potentially causing irreparable losses.
In one case, the court directed several identified websites to immediately stop hosting or streaming IPL content. It also issued a dynamic injunction, allowing JioStar to flag new infringing platforms in real time, which must then be blocked swiftly by domain registrars and internet service providers.
In a parallel order, the court turned its attention to piracy through mobile apps, particularly Android-based platforms distributing content via APK files. A broader dynamic+ injunction was granted, extending to future variants, mirror links and related interfaces, signalling a tougher stance on evolving piracy tactics.
The court also directed domain name registrars to suspend offending domains and share registrant details, including KYC and payment information. Internet service providers and telecom operators have been instructed to block access within strict timelines, in some instances within 36 hours. Both the Department of Telecommunications and the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology have been asked to facilitate enforcement through necessary notifications.
Noting the fast-changing nature of digital piracy, the court emphasised the need for real-time enforcement tools to keep pace with anonymous and constantly shifting networks. It also underlined the commercial impact of piracy on legitimate rights holders.
The ruling reinforces the judiciary’s firm stance on protecting intellectual property in the digital age. For viewers, it is a reminder to stick to official platforms as the IPL season kicks off under tighter watch.







