Broadcasting Dispute Become a Regular One in India

As the Supreme Court of India noted in its landmarkby the agent of exclusive telecast rights holder for
judgment pertaining to the broadcast media, ‘thethe India-Pakistan cricket series, Taj Sports India Pvt
airwaves’ are ‘public property’. TheirLtd . After hearing of arguments, the Apex Court
use has to be controlled and regulated by a publichas directed Ten Sports which is the management
authority in the interests of the public and to preventcompany of Taj Television Ltd, to share the signal
the invasion of their rights. Obviously the onlywith DD citing ‘public interest’ since India
legitimate role for the state in this regard is that ofwas a cricket crazy nation and more than half the
trustees for the public. It is surprising to see acricket crazy people did not have access to Ten
government organization enforcing its rights soSports. It was clarified in the order that Ten's signal
aggressively. India’s national broadcastershould be relayed by DD as is complete with logo and
‘Doordarshan’ having taken a strongall the advertising that the Dubai-based sports
objection to private news channels using thebroadcaster Taj television ltd has secured. The apex
unauthorized recording of the Beijing Olympics 2008.court also ordered Prasar Bharati to deposit Rs 100
Prasar Bharti has obtained an order from the Delhimillion with it as surety towards compensation
High Court that restrains all private news channelspayable, if any, to Ten Sports in regard to the
from sharing Doordarshan's footage of the Beijingdispute .
Olympics, unless they enter into a commercialOn February 17, 2006 the Board of Control for
agreement with Prasar Bharati and the IndianCricket in India (BCCI) on awarded global media rights
Olympics Association. Then they issued a letter to allto Nimbus Communications for all international and
private broadcasting organizations states that theirdomestic crickets owned or controlled by BCCI to be
sole rights over the broadcasting of the Beijingplayed in India over the next four years. The
Olympics, and anyone interested of showing it onbroadcasting rights from March 1, 2006, to March 31,
their channel needs to make an agreement with us.2010. Nimbus Communications paid $612 million to
Prasar Bharati filed a complaint against private newsBCCI for getting this exclusive right. Public
channels before the Delhi High Court on August 22,broadcaster Prasar Bharati did not participate in the
2008 for “encroaching” on exclusivebidding process. This leads to next dispute between
broadcast rights to the Beijing Olympics 2008 . TheyNimbus and DD in January 2007 regarding the
paid around $3 million for getting the exclusivebroadcasting right over the second One Day
broadcasting right to the Olympics Association. TheInternational between India and West Indies. Nimbus
only way of to recover this investment is the sale offiled a petition before the Delhi High Court for
advertising spots, and the sale of footage to otherpreventing DD from using footage of our exclusive
broadcasters. They argue footage beamed by otherright. But in its provisional order, the court directed
news channels damages these viable interests. So theNimbus to provide feed to DD, which will telecast it
national broadcaster is set to claim damages ofon DD International and its DTH service. The cricket
around Rs 5 crore from over a dozen news channelsaction on DD International will, however, be at a
for illegal usage of footage. Several news channelsdelay of seven minutes. Considering the popularity of
have been using the live telecast especially in the lastsports events in India especially cricket, DD and
few days of Olympics; it includes the games involvedgovernment always manages to force private
by Indian participants Abhinav Bindra (shooting), Sushilbroadcasters into sharing their signal with national
Kumar (wrestling), Vijender Kumar (boxing), Sainabroadcaster.
Nehwal (badminton) and Anju Bobby GeorgeIn an interview given to CNN-IBN, the Union
(athletics).Information and Broadcasting Minister Priyaranjan
The private news channels for their part can argueDasmunsi said "BCCI had no right to sell the terrestrial
the “fair dealing” exception under section 52and radio broadcasting rights to Nimbus because they
of Indian Copyright Act which allows for the use ofare sacrosanct and belong to Prasar Bharati and AIR
copyrighted material for the purpose of reportingrespectively," Dasmunsi went as far as alleging that
current events. It is most likely that the newsBCCI violated government guidelines when it invited
channels will get away with breaching the guidelines,tenders to sell the cricket broadcasting rights. BCCI
while broadcasting more than 10 seconds of theSecretary Niranjan Shah responds that they would
medal winning matches, by citing public interest;abide by the rules of the country but they too need
however, there will still be hell to pay forto earn money. "We will look at it. We have to abide
broadcasting the spectacular opening ceremony whichby the rules and regulations of the country but we
was one of the most viewed events in the world.have to also earn money. If we don't sell the rights
The same stands true if any news channel washow will we get the money?
broadcasting entire events.For escaping from the continuing conflict over the
They also argue in the defense of using footagedistribution/sharing of broadcasting signal,
hinged primarily on two points. The first point putDoordarshan used its supremacy with the ministry for
across by the private channels was that since theInformation and Broadcasting (I&B), which made it
Olympic Games take place once in four years, it wasmandatory for private television channels to share
in 'public interest' to show it to the larger public intheir live feed of the all one day international (ODI)
India, especially when Indian sports persons havecricket matches and the Twenty20 ties and some
won medals for the country in their respective sportsother test matches, citing public interest abroad . This
items. The second point was that the footage of the“Broadcasting Signals Ordinance 2007”
Olympics beamed by the private news channelsmandates that live television and radio feed, minus
clearly showed “Dordarshan's logo”, whichadvertisements, be shared with Doordarshan and All
not only ensured that the footage did not pass offIndia Radio for events judged as being of national
as their own, but actually helped moved eyeballs toimportance by the Union Government. On the
DD sports.contrary, private television channels had paid
On March 15, 2004, the Supreme Court produce asubstantial amounts of cash to secure telecast rights
provisional order on a special leave petition (SLP) filedto all of those matches .