Mulling measures to regulate OTT, Centre tells Supreme Court
Tribune News Service
New Delhi, February 16
The Centre on Tuesday told the Supreme Court that it was contemplating certain measures to regulate Over the Top (OTT) platforms such as Netflix and Amazon Prime.
Acting on a PIL seeking OTT regulation by an autonomous body, a Bench led by Chief Justice SA Bobde asked the government to spell out its stand in six weeks even as Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj said the government was contemplating measures on the issue.
Plea on return of MPLAD funds junked
- The SC on Tuesday dismissed a plea seeking direction to the Centre to return Rs 365 crore donated by MPs from MPLADS fund to PM CARES Fund for tackling exigencies emerging from the Covid-19 pandemic.
- The Bench said it was not inclined to entertain the petition and dismissed it. Advocate Dushyant Tiwari said Rs365 crore were donated by lawmakers from MPLADS in the PM CARES Fund, in contravention of the guidelines. PTI
The top court had on October 15 last year issued notice to the Centre on a PIL seeking setting up of an autonomous body to regulate OTT platforms, which provide paid film and television content to consumers via a high-speed Internet connection.It had asked the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting and Internet and Mobile Association of India to respond to the PIL filed by advocate Shashank Shekhar Jha.
The government had earlier told the court in the Sudarshan News case that there was a need to regulate digital media in India. Jha wanted the top court to direct the government to set up a body for monitoring of content on different OTT/streaming and digital media platforms.
He pointed out that there was no law or autonomous body governing the digital content to monitor and manage these digital content available to the public at large without any filter.
None of the OTT/streaming platforms, including Netflix, Amazon Prime, Zee5 and Hotstar, have signed the self-regulation provided by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting since February 2020, the petitioner contended.
