Waves sources content from its rightful owners: Prasar Bharati tells TDSAT

In its reply before the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) in the matter filed by the All India Digital Cable Federation (AIDCF), Prasar Bharati has strongly contested the maintainability of the petition that alleged uplinking and downlinking of satellite broadcast signals on OTT platform WAVES. 

The public broadcaster argued that the dispute falls outside the jurisdiction of the tribunal as it pertains to OTT platform Waves and not a regulated broadcasting or distribution service.

In the reply filed before TDSAT, Prasar Bharati submitted at the outset that the petition concerns the OTT platform “Waves,” which is developed and operated by Prasar Bharati, and that issues concerning OTT platforms do not fall within the jurisdiction of TDSAT. 

Prasar Bharati stated that while operating an OTT platform, it is neither a licensee nor a service provider in the context contemplated under the TRAI Act. 

According to the reply, the petition proceeds on a “misconception” that operation of the Waves OTT platform involves uplinking and downlinking of satellite broadcast signals.

The broadcaster argued that the operation of an OTT platform is technologically and functionally distinct from satellite signal distribution and does not involve uplinking or downlinking of television signals as contemplated under the Guidelines for Uplinking and Downlinking of Satellite TV Channels in India, 2022.

The reply further stated that the content being made available on the Waves platform is neither uplinked to a satellite by content providers nor downlinked by Prasar Bharati from a satellite. Instead, the content is sourced through the internet and distributed again over the internet. Hence, according to Prasar Bharati, the Uplinking and Downlinking Guidelines are not attracted to the operation of the OTT platform or to the sourcing of content for the same.

Prasar Bharati also argued that while making content available on the OTT platform, content providers are not acting as broadcasters, service providers or licensees within the meaning of the TRAI Act and related regulations. Similarly, it maintained that Prasar Bharati itself is not acting as a broadcaster, service provider or licensee while sourcing content for Waves or making it available on the OTT platform.

“The content provider as well as Respondent No. 1 wear different hats and are not broadcasters in the context of the dealing for the purpose of the OTT Platform,” the reply stated.

According to the submission, the dispute raised by AIDCF therefore cannot be treated as one between two service providers or licensees, since the OTT platform is not a broadcasting service and does not involve sharing of signals.

Prasar Bharati further argued that OTT platforms are governed by the Information Technology Act and Rules, and not by the broadcasting regulations or uplinking/downlinking framework applicable to traditional television distribution systems. It stated that neither Prasar Bharati nor the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting can be considered a “service provider” in this context under the TRAI Act.

In support of its arguments, the public broadcaster referred to TRAI’s own Explanatory Memorandum to the 2017 Tariff Order, where the regulator had clarified that OTT operators and platforms are not covered under any permission or licence granted by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting and therefore are not covered under the present regulatory framework applicable to distribution platform operators.

Prasar Bharati also submitted that an OTT platform is not a “distribution platform” as defined under the Telecommunication (Broadcasting & Cable) Services Interconnection Addressable Systems Regulations, 2017, and further argued that an OTT platform is not a television channel at all.

The broadcaster informed the tribunal that judicial notice of these distinctions had already been taken by TDSAT in its order dated October 4, 2023, in Broadcasting Petition No. 217 of 2023.

Describing the operational structure of Waves, the reply said the platform functions as an internet-based OTT aggregation service that enables access to multi-format digital content across internet-enabled devices.

Prasar Bharati outlined several characteristics of the platform to reinforce its position, including that Waves does not involve satellite signal transmission or reception, does not rely on decoder-based access systems, and does not function as a broadcasting platform within the meaning of the broadcasting regulatory framework.

It also argued that the platform does not originate or operate third-party broadcast channels in the conventional sense and merely sources content from rightful owners, adapts it for OTT distribution, and makes it available digitally.

Further, Prasar Bharati said operation of the platform does not involve uplinking, downlinking or retransmission of satellite signals, nor participation in the regulated signal distribution chain such as cable, DTH, IPTV or HITS systems.

According to the reply, content on Waves is made available solely on the basis of digital or OTT rights granted by content owners and is delivered through IP-based streaming mechanisms independent of the regulated broadcasting chain.

“From the above it is clear that the functioning of Waves is premised on sourcing content from its rightful owners through valid contracts and does not involve uplinking, downlinking, or retransmission of satellite signals,” the filing stated, adding that OTT platforms operate in a “distinct legal space” governed by the IT Rules and not by regulations applicable to traditional broadcasting.

Prasar Bharati also pointed out that across the OTT ecosystem, broadcasters and content owners routinely make their channels and live streams available across multiple digital platforms. It cited the example of channels such as Aaj Tak making continuous live streams available on publicly accessible platforms like YouTube.

The reply further argued that the same channels are available across several OTT platforms and digital applications operated by private entities, and such multi-platform distribution is now an established industry-wide practice enabled through digital rights arrangements.

“No restriction or prohibition has been imposed on such practices across the industry,” Prasar Bharati submitted, while alleging that the petition selectively targets the Waves OTT platform despite similar availability of content across multiple private digital platforms.

In the specific case of Waves, Prasar Bharati informed TDSAT that it had issued a Notice Inviting Applications dated November 17, 2025, pursuant to which content providers and right holders expressed interest in granting rights for showcasing content on the platform. According to the reply, 46 content providers were onboarded through this process.

The broadcaster maintained that this arrangement does not violate the Guidelines for Uplinking and Downlinking of Satellite TV Channels in India, 2022, as alleged in the petition, because the content is received and distributed entirely through IP-based internet networks and has “no nexus to the uplinking and downlinking of satellite signals.”