---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Arun Mehta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Aug 29, 2006 4:00 PM
In this country, you can run roughshod over many people, but not
journalists. They protect their own freedom of speech very zealously.
The goverment has sought comments at the address [EMAIL PROTECTED] by
September 11, please do oblige.
My own comments on the draft bill, followed by an article talking of a
major revamp, below:
Of course, the draft broadcast bill says nothing about community
radio, except to stick with the campus law we find disgusting (only
well recognised edu institutions allowed, no news and current affairs
may be discussed). But that is not the worst.
The biggest problem with the draft broadcast bill, is its definition
of broadcasting:
> "Broadcasting" means assembling and programming any form of communication
> content like signs, signals, writing, pictures, images and sounds, and either
> placing it in electronic form on electro-magnetic waves on specified
> frequencies and transmitting it through space or cables to make it
> continuously available on the carrier waves, or continuously streaming it in
> digital data form on the computer networks, so as to be accessible to single
> or multiple users through receiving devices either directly or indirectly;
> and all its grammatical variations and cognate expressions;
It doesn't matter if it is one-to-one, spoken or written: if it has
been transmitted electronically, it constitutes broadcasting. This
means, you must have a license, and not say anything on the phone that
Prasar Bharati wouldn't broadcast on All India Radio. Even the use of
a telephone comes under the definition, because communication to a
single person is still broadcasting. Text, audio and video blogs, even
newspapers on the Internet come under the ambit — why, email lists
too, so would the members of india-gii like to write to the I&B
ministry, asking it to rework the definition of broadcasting, so that
we are not threatened?
another key issue in determining what constitutes broadcasting should
be: what is the minimum power below which it does not qualify as
broadcasting? Otherwise, your PC is regulated as well, for the
monitor emits radiation. Karaoke using cordless microphones would be
banned as well, because you would be broadcasting copyright material
without permission.
Is language such as "all its grammatical variations and cognate
expressions" normal language in policy documents? To me it sounds
all-encompassing, needlessly broad.
How do other countries define broadcasting?
> No person shall, after the commencement of this Act, provide any broadcasting
> service, or broadcast any program or channel, without obtaining a license for
> such service or permission for such program or registration of such channel,
If my interpretation of the definition of broadcasting under the bill
is correct, you
would need licenses for all sorts of activities that did not need
licenses before. Including using the phone.
>
> the Central Government may, by notification, exempt a Public Service
> Broadcaster or such other category of broadcasters, as may be specified, from
> all or any of the provisions of this Act.
Why does the government have this need to be above the law? This also
skews the level playing field in favour of the PSB, further discussed
below.
> till such time as the Content code is notified under this Act, all service
> providers shall adhere to the Programme Code and the Advertising Code
> prescribed under the Cable Television Network Rules 1994.
Which include:
> 6. Programme Code.-(1) No programme should be carried in the cable service
> which-
> ...
> (b) contains criticism of friendly countries;
...
> (i) criticises, maligns or slanders any individual in person or
> certain groups, segments of social, public and moral life of the country;
Would the government please tell me, which countries are friendly,
which aren't? Is anyone aware of such a list -- does Prasar Bharati
have one? Likewise, which groups and which segments of social, public
and moral life are taboo? And who gets to take these decisions?
>
> 6. Mandatory sharing of certain sports broadcast signals: For the purpose of
> ensuring the widest availability of broadcast signals for viewing in India,
> no content rights owner or holder and no television or radio broadcasting
> service provider shall carry a live television broadcast on any cable or DTH
> network or radio commentary broadcast in India of such national or
> international sporting events, held in India or abroad, as may be notified by
> the Central Government to be of national importance, unless simultaneously,
> it shares the live broadcast signal, without its advertisements, with the
> public service broadcasters i.e. Doordarshan and All India Radio of Prasar
> Bharti, in such a manner as to enable them to re-transmit the same on their
> respective terrestrial networks and DTH networks, on such terms and
> conditions as may be prescribed.
Why should the government alone decide, which international sporting
events are of
national importance -- if indeed sports deserve to be considered this
important? Why is this only an issue in the case of cricket? Because
this means large sums of money.
When making policy in areas where it has a commercial interest, such
as telecom and
broadcasting, the government seems to think that whatever is good for
its bottom line is
good for the country. In telecom every policy government makes seems to have the
commercial interests of BSNL and MTNL firmly in mind.
> (2) No content broadcasting service provider and its associated companies
> shall have more than 20% share of paid up equity or have any other financing
> or commercial arrangement that may give it management control over the
> financial, management or editorial policies of any broadcasting network
> service provider.
In simple English, I would think this means that someone who owns a
channel cannot own more than 20% of a cable network, DTH facility, and
the like. Doesn't that mean trouble for Zee and Star, now that the
latter also has DTH? And this is why Prasar Bharati wants exemption
from the law!
> (4) No content broadcasting service provider and its associated companies
> shall have more than the prescribed share of the total number of channels in
> a city or a state subject to the overall ceiling of 15% for the whole country.
Who prescribes this share? Wouldn't this allow Maran at the center to
finger Jayalalitha at the state, or vice versa? What sense does a cap
on terrestrial channels make, when there are so few?
>
> (a) The share of content produced in India shall not be less than 15% of
> the total content of a channel broadcast during every week.
Out go a whole bunch of channels, or they will have to apply for
exemption -- a great source of corruption ... it could help the local
content producers, but I do not see the need for this.
> (b) The share of public service/social messaging through advertisements and
> such other promotional materials/messages shall not be less than 10% of the
> total commercial time of a channel broadcast during every week.
> (c) The share of public service/socially relevant program content shall not
> be less than 10% of the total program content of a channel broadcast during
> every week.
> (2) In the event of failure to comply with the public service obligation,
> every content-broadcasting service provider shall be liable to pay such
> amount as may be prescribed by the Central Government towards its public
> service obligation.
So, either you put some public service stuff, or pay a tax! Again a
way of skewing things in favour of the government owned channel --
which could choose to be exempt, of course!
> (3) The Central Government shall formulate detailed guidelines and
> institutional arrangement for evaluation of every television and radio
> broadcaster in respect of its public service broadcasting obligation.
I don't like the sound of this. Allows government to dangle a
Damocles' sword over broadcasters.
>
> The Central Government shall, by notification, appoint a whole-time
> Chairperson and six whole-time members of the Authority at the rate of one
> each from amongst persons who have special knowledge of and professional
> experience in, the fields of
> (a) Television, Radio, Cinema, Advertising, Audio-Visuals, Fine Arts etc.;
> (b) Journalism, Mass Communication, Literature, Social Sciences etc.;
> (c) Finance, Commerce, Audit, Accountancy etc.;
> (d) Electronics, Telecommunication, Information Technology etc;
> (e) Consumer Affairs, Social Work/Service, Civil Society Organizations etc.;
> (f) Law, Judiciary etc.;
> (g) Public Administration, Management etc.;
This I like. But they shouldn't be government people, especially since
the staff will all be on deputation from government:
> (2) The Central Government shall make available to the Authority, a panel of
> not less than three officers of the rank of the Additional Secretary to the
> Government of India, and the Authority may select one of them and recommend
> his appointment as Secretary of the Authority to the Government.
Why shouldn't the authority be able to pick the best people in the
country for the job? Why do these have to be reserved parking for the
IAS?
Now, what is the Broadcast Authority supposed to do?
>
> Recommend to the Central Government, guidelines or norms or amendments of
> prescribed guidelines or norms, in the light of its experience in the
> discharge of its functions, as well as on such other issues as may be
> referred to it by the Government;
Like the TRAI, no powers to make policy. The policymakers will
continue to be faceless. So, like with the TRAI, we first make
recommendations, which the regulator waters down in its
recommendations, which then the government further dilutes, or simply
dismisses without providing any reason. And the government, going by
its track record, will continue to make policy designed to support
Prasar Bharati.
BRAI be charged with developing public policy, for which the
government must be given very restricted powers to overrule..
>
> The places and types and quantity of equipment to be provided, free of cost,
> by the licensee service provider for monitoring of content and the quality of
> technical standards of service, and the manner in which such monitoring may
> be carried out by the licensing authorities or authorised officers under
> clause (e) of sub-
> section (1) of section 21.
Another reason why it does not make sense to have such a broad
definition of broadcasting as to include all electronic communication.
Horribly expensive, not to mention obnoxious.
>
> The manner in which broadcasters shall establish and operate the system of
> self-
> certification of broadcasting content under sub-section (vii) of section 9;
So, the regulator will tell the industry how to certify itself... but
seems interesting, asking the sports channels to certify whether WWF
is fit for kids ;-)
>
> . Punishment for offences under this Act: (1) A person who in contravention
> of the provisions of this Act, provides, distributes or receives any
> broadcasting service which is not licensed under sub-section (1) of section 3
> or broadcasts a channel which is not registered or a program which is not
> permitted under sub-
> section (1) of section 4, or abets or assists transmission or distribution of
> such service or content, as the case may be, in any manner which may include
> collection of subscription for his principal, issuing of advertisements to
> such service, dealing in or distribution of decoders, shall be guilty of
> committing an offence of illegal broadcasting, and on conviction, shall be
> punishable with imprisonment which may extend up to three years, or with fine
> which may extend up to rupees twenty five Lakhs or both, and for subsequent
> offence and conviction such imprisonment may extend to five years or fine up
> to rupees fifty Lakhs, or with both.
Five years imprisonment and fifty lakhs for listening to radio on
shortwave, or viewing a blog?
>
> Provided that unauthorized decoding or receiving of a program that is not
> permitted or of a channel that is not registered or dealing in or
> distribution of equipment for the purpose shall also constitute an offence of
> illegal broadcasting and shall be dealt with accordingly.
Another situation, in which a large number of people, small kids
included, will be criminalized.
>
> (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 31 or section 37 of the
> Indian Copyright Act, 1957, where one or more persons have made complaints in
> respect of a work which has been published or performed in public or which
> has already been broadcast or whose licensed reproductions have already been
> made available in public, licenses shall be granted to all such complainants
> under sub-section (1) of section 31 of the Indian Copyright Act 1957.
Sajan explained to me, that under the Copyright Act, the right to
broadcast a film song - for instance - cannot be denied to a radio
channel if the song is already in the public domain. Unfortunately,
since it is a very old law that did not foresee a multiplicity of TV
and radio channels, only the 'first complainant' or the 'best
complainant' (so to speak) got the right to broadcast the song. The
present Bill seeks to correct this aberration, by giving the right to
all broadcasters (complainants), assuming that they are willing to pay
a reasonable royalty for the music.
We need a general "fair use" provision, not just this limited case.
Arun
http://www.newswatch.in/?p=5373
Dasmunsi hints at major revamp of draft broadcast bill
July 13, 2006 | Anon | Indiantelevision.com
» Previous page » Email this item » Print page » Link to
original story
NEW DELHI: You can kiss the Broadcast Services Regulation Bill 2006 -
a draft of which is doing the rounds of various ministries and
industry stakeholders these days - goodbye, Well, almost.
"Whenever I bring a Bill to Parliament, it'd be the most
media-friendly legislation in the whole world," information and
broadcasting minister Priyaranjan Dasmunsi today said, hinting that
the draft is likely to go undergo major revamp.
Speaking to journalists on the sidelines of a Cabinet briefing,
Dasmunsi added that proper consultation with various stake holders
would be held before draft legislation is taken to the Union Cabinet
or Parliament.
Asked by indiantelevision.com whether the Broadcast Bill 2006 would be
tabled in Parliament during the forthcoming monsoon session, the
minister said the endeavour be so "after holding discussions with
everybody."
"Our effort and endeavour would be to do so during this session and if
that does not happen, then we'll see in the next session. We would not
do anything to gag the media," Dasmunsi explained, making it clear
that the government has taken serious view of the all round stringent
criticism of a draft media legislation.
The monsoon session of Parliament begins on 24 July and there seems
little time left to hold proper discussions with the industry on the
Bill, which has been drafted surreptiously and left the players
stumped when unraveled by a section of the media.
Making an overt bid to keep in good humour the media, which came in
for praise from the Cabinet today for its sensitive coverage of the
serial Mumbai blasts earlier this week, Dasmunsi said, "All fears (of
broadcast industry) will be removed."
Proposals on cross media restrictions, powers bestowed on authorities
to take action against the media and TV channels on the flimsiest of
grounds, content censorship (which is being drafted separately, but
could be made part of this Bill or legislation at a later stage) are
aimed at strangling the media and cripple business models in the name
of safety against monopolistic trends.
The proposed autonomous Broadcast Regulatory Authority of India (Brai)
has been given powers in the Bill that permit it to run amok if
interpreted incorrectly by it. What's more, Brai's chief executive
would be a serving government official of additional secretary's rank,
drawing a salary from the government.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
greenyouth mailinglist is the activist support mailinglist for kerala run by
Global Alternate Information Applications (GAIA)
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
