It was all started by a cable ops' body, National Cable
& Telecom Association (NCTA), when it shot off a letter to Trai
on 2 October itself pointing out that a suggestion on "Promotion
of Competition in Distribution of TV channels" (clause-6.3) may
actually turn tout to be `anti-competitive'
and lead to monopolistic trends.
Quoting from the Trai recommendations that "broadcasters will
not be held to be in violation of the must-provide condition if
it is ensured that the signals are provided through a particular
designated agent/distributor or any other intermediary and not directly,"
NCTA had contended that a scenario could not be ruled out that Star
or Zee Telefilms, for example, provide exclusive signals to their
affiliates (like Hathway, Siti Cable and RPG, which is an exclusive
distributor of star channels in Kolkata) who could
continue the monopolistic trends.
Star India, meanwhile, is said to have put across its views to
Trai on the must-provide clause in an informal manner, holding the
position that making available all the content to everybody may
not be that good an idea as programming acquisition is costly.
At a recent Indian Broadcasting Foundation (IBF) meeting in Mumbai,
too, some broadcasters has expressed their reservation on "must-provide",
which may get reflected during a scheduled interaction with the
government that IBF is scheduled to have on Monday.
Though this must-provide clause is yet to become a law, it has
seen its first defaulter in Indian pubcaster Doordarshan that refused
to share two of its channels showing cricket matches with the Zee
Group's Dish TV, country's first DTH service.
Asked about this aspect, a senior Trai official wryly said, "Well,
the instance has been brought to our notice, but the must-provide
clause is yet to become a law."
|