- Post merger of HITS-Cable TV biz, IMCL’s FY17 net loss swells to Rs 206 crore
- RIL Surges 4% After Telecom Regulator Slashes Interconnect Charges
- Mumbai Rains: 34 domestic flights cancelled till 12 pm today, main runway remains shut
- Tata Sons buys big chunk of shares in group firms
- Swine flu: 42 positive case in Mohali
- HIV blood transfusion probe: High-level team gives clean chit to Regional Cancer Centre
- Flipkart, Amazon in Rs100 crore ad blitz
- Politicians may have helped Iqbal Kaskar net 100 crore in 3 years
- Mobile bills to go down as Trai cuts call termination charges to 6 p/min
Hearing the petition filed by Maa TV against TRAI’s regulation, the Delhi High Court observed that the cap on advertisements is a ‘reasonable exercise’. The bench also said that even the permitted 12 minutes of advertising during a one-hour programming is ‘ridiculous’. HC, however, gave interim relief to Maa TV till next hearing on 13 March.
TRAI lists out how vertically integrated MSOs got sweet deals, prompting the regulator to clip the wings of content aggregators. For non-vertically integrated distribution platforms, the rates being charged were, in some cases, 62% higher. The situation became even worse in the case of relatively smaller non-vertically integrated distribution platforms, TRAI said.
TRAI has narrowed the role of the content aggregators through its new regulation, prompting MSOs and DTH service providers to instinctively feel that they can no longer be ‘bullied’ by Media Pro, MSM Discovery or IndiaCast UTV. TVP looks at the salient features of the regulation and examines the impact.
Broadcasters who had filed petitions in the Delhi High Court against TRAI’s ad cap regulation have got an interim relief. The court has for the time being prevented the regulator from taking any coercive action against the broadcasters for violating the 12-minute ad cap.The Delhi HC bench today accepted the petitions and extended the protection till 13 March.
In the ongoing ad cap regulation case at the TDSAT, the music broadcasters’ counsel finished arguments for the petitioners.