Introduction

The Union Cabinet, yesterday, permitted the introduction of Direct-to-Home services in the country, after extensive deliberations by the group of ministers.

This move has brought into focus the regulation concerning the use of a frequency range known as the Ku Band. Ku-band satellite transmissions occupy the 10 to 17 GHz frequency range. These relatively high frequency transmissions correspond to shorter wavelengths and therefore a smaller antenna can be used to receive the minimum signal strength. Ku-band antennas can be as small as 18 inches in diameter.

This makes it suitable for home users even in remote areas, where conventional cable networks are not in place. As the name suggests, the presence of intermediaries such as cable network operators is dispensed with in the case of DTH services. In fact, yesterday's decision ostensibly supports introducing DTH services to increase competition in a heretofore monopoly market.

More importantly, the relevance of Ku band to future convergent platforms, though mentioned has not received the attention that it deserves. The introduction of DTH services would provide a window for broadcasting companies to migrate to providing more interactive services in video, audio and text on such platforms. Significantly, it would also provide new media companies with the ideal platform to provide integrated and interactive broadband services.

The Ban

It was in 1996, that the Government, in response to Star TV's plans to provide DTH services to India through its IskyB venture, brought out a notification (under the Radio, Television and Video Cassette Recorder Rules and the Telegraph Act, 1885 and the Wireless Telegrapy Act, 1933) which banned the use of Ku band receivers. Subsequently, in 1997, a second notification reiterated the same ban on the use of receivers capable of receiving Ku band frequencies.

The above notifications were apparently aimed at prohibiting the use of Ku Band for DTH broadcasting. However, the notification did not make a distinction between use of the Ku band for broadcasting and non-broadcasting purposes. As a result the use of the Ku band even for non-broadcasting purposes was prohibited.

Even at that stage, the possibility of permitting DTH Services in the future was not expressly dismissed as it was to be regulated by the then proposed Broadcast Bill. However, the Broadcast Bill did not see light of the day as a statute and lapsed, after its introduction in the Parliament.

Communications in Ku Band

Even prior to yesterday's announcement, there have been parallel developments as regards the use of Ku band for communications purposes. The New Telecom Policy 1999 made a marked shift from the earlier position by announcing that the use of Ku band for communication purposes would be permitted. Thereafter, the Government permitted the use of Ku band transponders on foreign or Indian satellites by ISP Gateways for internet traffic. V-Sat operators who had been restricted to the use of extended C-band, were later permitted to use the Ku band transponders on INSAT satellites.

However, there was a lack of conceptual clarity in the framework governing Ku band use, considering the fact that there was no repeal or suitable amendment of the 1996 and 1997 notifications.

Although there has been considerable co-ordination between the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting and the Ministry of Communications (the said notifications having been issued by the MoC at the instance of MIB), the framework as viewed by industry players was incoherent.

Regulator concerns

Past events of regulation seem to indicate that the concerns of regulators have been primarily been that of content, security and competition. While the concern of the MIB was primarily one of content and any possible adverse impact on Prasar Bharati, the MoC concerns point towards security.

According to press reports available at the time of writing, the present regulations seek to address these concerns by, inter alia, providing for a) substantial Indian control of the operations of the DTH licence holder through foreign investment regulations and management control regulation b) mandatory uplink from an Indian earth station c) advertising and broadcasting codes d) mandatory carrying of Prasar Bharti channels on most favourable terms.

The earlier announcement of the Uplinking Guidelines in July, 2000 seeks to encourage and provide momentum to the uplinking service industry in India. As per some reports, it appears that the recent announcement requires the DTH licence holders to establish their earth stations within 12 months of obtaining the licence. It appears that a logical move would be to permit the DTH licence holders to outsource their uplinking service requirements, this being in consonance with the policy on promoting the fledgling uplinking services industry.

At the user end, it is not clear what regulations would apply. While this clears the way for users to acquire Ku band receivers, one wonders how the transmissions of foreign unlicensed operators would be controlled. One option would be to impose an obligation on the receivers to tune in to only those frequencies which are allocated to licenced DTH operators. The practicalities of this option would however need to be evaluated.

Going forward on convergence

To view the issue of Ku band transmissions merely as a "content" or "security" issue would be a case of wearing blinkers. In any event, the banning of receivers was undoubtedly a case of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

The use of Ku band actually raises more fundamental questions on the regulation in the context of convergence activity, which mandate an introspection of the reasons for policy distinction rather than addressing a particular delivery mode.

Given the fact the recent recommendations focus on the use of Ku band from the perspective of broadcasting, it is not unreasonable to apprehend that the regulation on use for communication purposes would require far more debate and discussion at all levels.

It is true that the recent announcements indicate that a separate licence would be required to use the Ku band for voice, data and fax communications. However, communications technologies are advancing at such a rapid pace that existing regulations which attempt to separate communications and broadcasting as distinctly regulated categories may not be conducive to emerging services.

Yesterday's announcement seeks to distinguish DTH services from voice, data and fax "communications". However, the supposed distinction may not be robust even in present-day digital / packet technology, let alone futuristic technologies. It is time we examine hard issue such as the essential difference between telecom and broadcasting services, rather than seeking to base the distinction on limited parameters as the above.

One such difference between telecom and broadcasting could be that communications are essentially bidirectional whereas broadcasting is essentially unidirectional. However, even this distinction has, over the years blurred because of the new possibilities brought about by new technologies. For instance, communications streams such as the Internet are also being used to broadcast content to a viewing audience. The probability that this might become the norm has further been heightened by the recent advances that are enabling broadband satellite and land communications networks. In the case of broadcasting, new services are showing increasing promise of interactivity. There is clearly a movement towards enabling viewer choice as well as participation, in the process collecting vital advertising related data as well as direct/ indirect feedback on content.

The direction and momentum of new technology enabled services is clear - to provide high value addition to an existing content service by enabling user choice or participation. Phone-ins, WebTV and interactive DTH services all seek to achieve this simple goal through different means.

As mentioned earlier, there have been several regulatory changes in recent months impacting the use of ku band within the framework of the existing statutes, which require to be re-examined and integrated when considering convergent legislation.

Hopefully, this Winter Session of the Parliament will see the proposed Communications Bill, 2000 rising above the traditional understanding of technologies, networks and services.