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.
I&B Ministry
IT Rules tweaks are clarificatory, not expansion of powers: MeitY
Govt signals flexibility as platforms push for clarity on user content rules
NEW DELHI: The Centre has sought to dial down concerns over its proposed amendments to the IT Rules, with Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology secretary S Krishnan asserting that the changes are intended as clarifications rather than an expansion of regulatory powers.
Pushing back against criticism from platforms and civil society, S Krishnan said the amendments “do not in any way actually give us wider powers” and are meant to remove ambiguity in how existing provisions are applied. He added that the trigger came largely from within the ecosystem, with intermediaries themselves seeking clearer guidance on compliance, takedowns and record preservation.
At the heart of the debate is the growing friction between platforms and policymakers over responsibility for user-generated content. Intermediaries have argued that they should not be treated on par with publishers, particularly when content is created and uploaded by users. Krishnan acknowledged this concern, noting that “a sharper distinction” between user content and publisher content is needed and is currently under examination.
The issue becomes more complex in enforcement scenarios. While registered publishers can be directly asked to modify or remove content, intermediaries often lack control over the original creator. “In such cases, the intermediary cannot direct those changes,” Krishnan explained, underlining the need for procedural nuance.
Another key proposal under discussion is to bring user-generated news and current affairs content within a more unified regulatory ambit, potentially under the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. The move follows suggestions that a single authority should handle such content, regardless of whether it originates from a publisher or an individual user.
Even as the government frames the amendments as a tidy-up exercise, fault lines remain. Industry players have flagged concerns over compliance burdens, especially for smaller businesses, and questioned whether advisories could effectively become binding without explicit legislative backing. Krishnan said the government is mindful of these risks and is exploring ways to ease obligations, including possible relaxations under certain provisions.
The ministry is also considering consolidating multiple advisories and guidelines into a more structured framework, a step widely seen as addressing long-standing confusion over what platforms are expected to follow.
On takedowns, the government has reiterated that due process will remain unchanged. Krishnan stressed that actions will continue to be governed by established procedures, with reasons recorded and review mechanisms in place. He also pointed to the surge in deepfakes and synthetic media as a factor behind rising content disputes, calling it a “scale challenge” for regulators.
Interestingly, Krishnan also framed social media platforms as commercial entities rather than pure vehicles of free expression, hinting at a broader shift in regulatory thinking as platform economics come into sharper focus.
With stakeholders seeking more time and, in some cases, a rollback of the proposals, the government has kept the consultation process open-ended. Krishnan said further revisions remain on the table, signalling a willingness to adapt the draft based on feedback.
For now, the message from MeitY is clear: the rules may not be tightening in intent, but the effort to define them more clearly is well underway.
