I&B Ministry
Govt turns down IBF plea on downlink norm
NEW DELHI: The Indian government has turned down a request from the Indian Broadcasting Foundation (IBF) to extend the 180-day deadline for fulfilling newly-formulated downlinking norms by broadcasting companies.
In a letter to the information and broadcasting ministry, the IBF, an apex body of TV companies operating in India, had sought two months extension on the deadline since the downlink application form had been put out by the ministry on its website around 25h January 2006.
The government had given all TV companies a 180-day period from 11 November 2005 (when the guidelines were formulated and announced) to fulfill all conditions listed in the downlink policy to get landing rights in India.
The Indian government’s downlink policy has been a subject of debate in the broadcast industry with some players and industry bodies like the Hong Kong-based Casbaa terming the conditions harsh that will affect various business models of companies concerned.
Amongst the many conditions, the most important one being that all TV channels beaming into India will have to register themselves with the government/designated authority and establish a permanent establishment here irrespective of the fact whether they are uplinking from India or outside.
Establishment of permanent establishment in India is aimed at making TV companies, managing channels uplinked out of India, answerable to Indian laws. This would also result in a higher outflow of money as taxes to be paid in India.
In the past, there have been instances when the Indian arm of foreign
broadcasting companies have pleaded before disputes tribunal that they were not governed by Indian laws as they are mere advertising concessionaries undertaking marketing activities.
I&B Ministry
AIDCF moves TDSAT over Waves plan to stream linear TV channels
Industry body flags regulatory gap as OTT push sparks broadcast turf war
NEW DELHI: The battle between traditional television distributors and digital platforms has found its way to the courts, with the All India Digital Cable Federation (AIDCF) moving the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) against Prasar Bharati’s latest OTT play.
At the heart of the dispute is Waves, Prasar Bharati’s OTT platform, which has invited applications to onboard linear satellite TV channels. Aidcf, which represents multi-system operators (msos), argues that this move sidesteps existing broadcasting rules and risks tilting the playing field in favour of digital platforms.
The federation’s petition hinges on a key provision in the Uplinking and Downlinking Guidelines, 2022. Clause 11(3)(f) allows broadcasters to downlink channels only if they provide signal decoders to recognised distribution platforms such as MSOS, DTH operators, hits operators and iptv platforms. OTT platforms, aidcf points out, do not feature on that list.
In simple terms, AIDCF’s argument is this: if OTT platforms are not officially recognised distributors, they should not be receiving broadcast signals in the first place. By inviting channels onto Waves, the federation claims, Prasar Bharati is opening a backdoor that lets broadcasters bypass long-standing rules.
The concern goes beyond legal interpretation. Aidcf says OTT platforms currently operate without a clear regulatory framework, allowing them to expand into traditional broadcasting territory without the compliance burden that cable and satellite operators must carry. That, it argues, creates an uneven contest.
There is also a warning for broadcasters. If they provide signal decoders to an OTT platform like Waves, they could risk breaching the very conditions under which their downlinking permissions were granted.
For its part, Prasar Bharati’s Waves initiative is positioned as a step towards wider access and digital reach, bringing linear television into the streaming era. But critics say the move blurs the line between regulated broadcasting and largely unregulated streaming.
The matter is expected to come up before tdsat next week. The outcome could do more than settle a single dispute. It may help define how India regulates the fast-merging worlds of television and OTT, where the lines are getting fuzzier by the day and the stakes, sharper than ever.
