ajuravi007
Regulars
NEW DELHI: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (Tdsat) has dismissed the plea of broadcasters to stay the a la carte tariff order for non-Cas (conditional access system) areas.
The Tdsat said today (Tuesday) that the 4 October Tariff Order for non-Cas areas is an experiment in the interest of the consumer and should be implemented.
The tribunal did not heed the appeal by broadcasters that Trai (the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India) should be deterred from taking punitive action. Trai counsel said that "We shall take action," and Tdsat refused to order deterrence if prices are not declared, as the deadline for that has lapsed on 7 December.
Broadcasters will now have to declare the a la carte rates of their channels. Trai has said it will take action against broadcasters who have not declared the a la carte prices of their channels.
Till last week, Trai had taken a wait and watch policy. But after the hearing and Tdsat's verdict, the sector regulator has decided to take a tough stance.
Broadcasters like Set Discovery may decide to move the High Court, but no senior executives were willing to talk about it. A Star India spokesperson said it was yet to decide on what course of action to take.
The broadcasters were hoping that Tdsat would rule in their favour. Arguing for the broadcasters, Star senior counsel Ramji Srinivas repeatedly said that since the net result of the experiment would not benefit the subscribers, the tribunal should stay the order.
Srinivas quoted from an earlier affidavit of Trai, where it had said that implementation of a la carte in non-Cas areas without an addressable system being in place was not feasible, and argued that Trai was going against its own affidavit.
However, even this evoked little sympathy from Justice Kumar, who said the Order must be implemented.
"If you want to go on arguing you can do that, but I have said this will be implemented. I am listening to you and I am expediting the case, fixing an early date for the hearing, so please do not come in the way of implementation," he told a battery of broadcasting sector [COLOR=blue! important][COLOR=blue! important]lawyers[/COLOR][/COLOR].
The next hearing comes up on 15 January.
Hinduja-owned IndusInd Media & Ccommunications [COLOR=blue! important][COLOR=blue! important]Ltd[/COLOR][/COLOR] (IMCL) - which had earlier been impleaded in the original case - had filed its replies along with Trai.
The IMCL reply pointed out the salient features of the Order:
[*]Expected to create level a playing field not only for existing stakeholders but also for the emerging new players;
[*]Brings competitiveness amongst each channel, irrespective of the channels belonging to same broadcaster or of different broadcasters as the broadcasters are restrained from thrusting channels upon the MSO on an unnecessary basis;
[*]Attracts capital investment on network / infrastructure access, degitalisation, programming and content in the media, broadcasting and in distribution chain;
[*]Breaks monopolistic approach which is currently concentrated in the hands of a few broadcasters and thereby create competition amongst channels, which otherwise were being hard bundled by the broadcasters and / or their content aggregators;
[*]The manner and method of revenue models and business models of most of the stakeholders would most likely undergo a substantial change for the betterment of the industry and its subscribers;
[*]The impugned Tariff Order is expected to increase the level of transparency and inturn lessen the number of disputes amongst stakeholder;
[*]Would cause a transformation towards digitalization and addressability faster, which would further lead to transparency.
[*]Bring latest technological infusion / advancement and bring convergence rapidly then expected.
[*]The impugned Order also expects to bring the best global business practices including well-defined distribution margins, subject to the co-operation from the broadcasters.
[*]Transparency in charging prices when a channel migrates from one content aggregator / broadcaster to other content aggregator / broadcaster for distribution.
[/list]Trai has also assured the tribunal in its reply that it will ensure that the subscribers get the benefit of the Order. In its reply, Trai had showed the tribunal what steps have already been taken by it to do so.
Trai, however, said it will take some time for the benefit to reach the subscribers. Stating that the time must be granted, the tribunal said that an early date for the next hearing may be fixed.
According to Trai sources, so far only five broadcasters - mostly those with stand-alone channels - have declared their a la carte prices.
The Tdsat said today (Tuesday) that the 4 October Tariff Order for non-Cas areas is an experiment in the interest of the consumer and should be implemented.
The tribunal did not heed the appeal by broadcasters that Trai (the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India) should be deterred from taking punitive action. Trai counsel said that "We shall take action," and Tdsat refused to order deterrence if prices are not declared, as the deadline for that has lapsed on 7 December.
Broadcasters will now have to declare the a la carte rates of their channels. Trai has said it will take action against broadcasters who have not declared the a la carte prices of their channels.
Till last week, Trai had taken a wait and watch policy. But after the hearing and Tdsat's verdict, the sector regulator has decided to take a tough stance.
Broadcasters like Set Discovery may decide to move the High Court, but no senior executives were willing to talk about it. A Star India spokesperson said it was yet to decide on what course of action to take.
The broadcasters were hoping that Tdsat would rule in their favour. Arguing for the broadcasters, Star senior counsel Ramji Srinivas repeatedly said that since the net result of the experiment would not benefit the subscribers, the tribunal should stay the order.
Srinivas quoted from an earlier affidavit of Trai, where it had said that implementation of a la carte in non-Cas areas without an addressable system being in place was not feasible, and argued that Trai was going against its own affidavit.
However, even this evoked little sympathy from Justice Kumar, who said the Order must be implemented.
"If you want to go on arguing you can do that, but I have said this will be implemented. I am listening to you and I am expediting the case, fixing an early date for the hearing, so please do not come in the way of implementation," he told a battery of broadcasting sector [COLOR=blue! important][COLOR=blue! important]lawyers[/COLOR][/COLOR].
The next hearing comes up on 15 January.
Hinduja-owned IndusInd Media & Ccommunications [COLOR=blue! important][COLOR=blue! important]Ltd[/COLOR][/COLOR] (IMCL) - which had earlier been impleaded in the original case - had filed its replies along with Trai.
The IMCL reply pointed out the salient features of the Order:
[*]Expected to create level a playing field not only for existing stakeholders but also for the emerging new players;
[*]Brings competitiveness amongst each channel, irrespective of the channels belonging to same broadcaster or of different broadcasters as the broadcasters are restrained from thrusting channels upon the MSO on an unnecessary basis;
[*]Attracts capital investment on network / infrastructure access, degitalisation, programming and content in the media, broadcasting and in distribution chain;
[*]Breaks monopolistic approach which is currently concentrated in the hands of a few broadcasters and thereby create competition amongst channels, which otherwise were being hard bundled by the broadcasters and / or their content aggregators;
[*]The manner and method of revenue models and business models of most of the stakeholders would most likely undergo a substantial change for the betterment of the industry and its subscribers;
[*]The impugned Tariff Order is expected to increase the level of transparency and inturn lessen the number of disputes amongst stakeholder;
[*]Would cause a transformation towards digitalization and addressability faster, which would further lead to transparency.
[*]Bring latest technological infusion / advancement and bring convergence rapidly then expected.
[*]The impugned Order also expects to bring the best global business practices including well-defined distribution margins, subject to the co-operation from the broadcasters.
[*]Transparency in charging prices when a channel migrates from one content aggregator / broadcaster to other content aggregator / broadcaster for distribution.
[/list]Trai has also assured the tribunal in its reply that it will ensure that the subscribers get the benefit of the Order. In its reply, Trai had showed the tribunal what steps have already been taken by it to do so.
Trai, however, said it will take some time for the benefit to reach the subscribers. Stating that the time must be granted, the tribunal said that an early date for the next hearing may be fixed.
According to Trai sources, so far only five broadcasters - mostly those with stand-alone channels - have declared their a la carte prices.
