The draft seeks to consolidate existing television and radio authorisation and licensing guidelines under the Telecommunications Act.
According to industry executives and experts, it expands the definition of “terrestrial transmission medium” to include the internet, redefines internet protocol television (IPTV) as a service delivered over a closed network and calls for television signals to be supplied only to authorised distribution platform operators.
Also read | India emerging as multi-game esports market: JioBLAST CEO Charlie Cowdrey
Industry executives said the provisions could create ambiguity over the regulatory treatment of internet-delivered linear television services. They said Rule 2(21), which includes the internet within the definition of terrestrial transmission medium, could bring application-layer services, including internet-delivered linear television offerings, within the telecom regulatory framework. They also argued that Rule 2(8) departs from the globally accepted concept of IPTV as a managed-network service by defining it as a closed-network service.
Broadcasters also expressed concern over Rule 26(1)(b), which requires television channels to be distributed only through authorised platforms such as cable TV, direct-to-home (DTH) and IPTV. According to industry executives, the provision could restrict broadcasters from offering linear television channels directly through their own apps, smart TVs and websites over the open internet unless the rules explicitly clarify that such services remain outside the authorisation framework.
Also read | Two-thirds of India’s creators now come from non-metros: ReportThe concerns come as the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (Trai), following a reference from the ministry, is consulting on the regulation of application-based linear television distribution and free ad-supported streaming television services.
The consultation examines whether internet-delivered linear television services should be regulated like conventional broadcasting distribution platforms. Distribution platform operators have favoured regulation, while broadcasters and over-the-top (OTT) platforms have argued that internet-based services should remain outside the conventional broadcasting framework.
Legal experts also questioned the authorisation framework proposed under the draft rules. They said the Telecommunications Act is primarily intended to regulate the carriage of communication services, whereas the draft rules also make compliance with programme and advertising-related obligations a condition for authorisation, potentially bringing content regulation within a telecom licensing regime.
Broadcasting executives also objected to the proposed penalty framework, saying telecom-style civil penalties of up to ₹5 crore, along with provisions for suspension, revocation, non-renewal and deemed withdrawal of authorisations, are disproportionate for the broadcasting sector.