Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd has reportedly opposed the telecom regulator’s proposal to convey OTT content material companies underneath the authorisation of the Indian Telecommunications Act, 2023
In its counter-comments, Reliance Jio argued that this precept doesn’t apply to OTT platforms
Jio has now joined the checklist of Content material Supply Community (CDN) corporations, together with Netflix, Amazon, Common Studios and Warner Bros, in opposing the telecom regulator’s proposal to manage them
Reliance Jio
Infocomm Ltd has reportedly opposed the telecom regulator’s proposal to convey OTT content material companies underneath the authorisation of the Indian Telecommunications Act, 2023.
As per a Businessline report, in its counter-comments to the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), the corporate mentioned that there isn’t a foundation for subjecting OTT content material companies to the authorisation necessities of the Indian Telecommunications Act, 2023.
Jio has now joined the checklist of Content material Supply Community (CDN) corporations, together with Netflix, Amazon, Common Studios and Warner Bros, in opposing the telecom regulator’s proposal to manage them.
Earlier these corporations argued they don’t seem to be telecom operators and, subsequently, don’t fall underneath the regulator’s jurisdiction.
Bharti Airtel Ltd and different stakeholders have beforehand advocated for OTT platforms delivering broadcast content material by way of broadband or cell to be introduced underneath the authorisation framework, citing the precept of “similar service, similar guidelines.”
Nevertheless, in its counter-comments, Reliance Jio argued that this precept doesn’t apply to OTT platforms.
Whereas Jio’s authentic submission didn’t explicitly point out OTT companies, the corporate has beforehand known as for regulating OTT communication platforms however has not clarified how these differ from OTT content material platforms.
In its letter, Jio emphasised the excellence between OTT platforms and Distribution Platform Operators (DPOs), stating, “OTTs differ from different DPOs similar to cable TV, IPTV, DTH and many others., as these latter ship broadcasting companies by way of broadcasting networks established by them. Moreover, the licensed DPOs transmit licensed TV channels after buying them from broadcasters underneath the provisions of Uplinking and Downlinking Tips. Whereas OTT content material suppliers ship content material by way of public web.”
The corporate additional argued that the Info Expertise Act, 2000 already govern OTT content material companies, and its related Guidelines.
Different stakeholders just like the Broadband India Discussion board (BIF) mentioned, “TV and radio broadcasters observe a ‘push-model’ as they ship contents to mass audiences/viewers at a predetermined schedule. OTT platforms make content material obtainable to subscribers over the general public web and function on a pull mannequin (i.e. subscribers select and request for content material they want to watch from a web-based library made obtainable by the OTT platforms).”
Alternatively, Airtel argued that any platform delivering content material just like that offered by regulated distribution platforms ought to be introduced underneath an equal regulatory regime.
“OTT delivering broadcast content material by way of broadband / cell present the identical content material as offered by DTH operators to subscribers with no commensurate obligations of any variety. This strategy goes in opposition to the fundamental premise of TRAI’s endeavour to have a balanced regulatory framework. These anomalies result in dangers similar to exclusionary and discriminatory affect for subscribers who might not be capable to entry the identical broadcast content material on their alternative of supply medium,” mentioned Airtel, as reported by Businessline.
Notably, Airtel requested that Prasar Bharti’s OTT platform companies WAVES even be introduced throughout the purview of the authorisation framework.
