SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.K. SIKRI, PRAFULLA C. PANT, JJ.
STAR SPORTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED – APPELLANTS
VERSUS
PRASAR BHARATI & ORS. – RESPONDENTS
CIVIL APPEAL NO.5252 OF 2016 (ARISING OUT OF S.L.P. (CIVIL) NO. 8988 OF 2014)
Decided On : 27-05-2016
(b) Sports Broadcasting Signals (Mandatory Sharing with Prasar Bharati) Act, 2007 – Section 3(1) and (2) – Prasar Bharati to telecast the matches for the benefit of general masses – Broadcaster and Prasar Bharati to share revenue from advertisement in the ratio given in section 3(2) – Purposive interpretation. (Para 32)
(2012) 2 SCC 108 – Referred
(c) Sports Broadcasting Signals (Mandatory Sharing with Prasar Bharati) Act, 2007 – Section 3(1) and (2) with Rule 3(3) – Expression 'without its advertisements' in Section 3(1) and 'free from commercial advertisements' in rule 3(3) – Word 'its' cannot be confined to advertisements only of broadcasting service provider – Includes ‘content rights owner’ and ‘contents holder’ as well – Logos of sponsors included in world feed by Content holder ICC which is also the content right holder – Arrangement between the ICC and appellant, totally inconsequential. (Para 33)
(1999) 6 SCC 604; 1980 (Supp) SCC 513; (1995) 2 SCC 161 – Referred
Facts of the case:
In terms of Section 3 of the Television Broadcasting Organisation under the Sports Broadcasting Signals (Mandatory Sharing with Prasar Bharati) Act, 2007 the appellant was sharing the live broadcast signals with respondent No.1 Prasar Bharati.
The dispute has arisen in respect of the contents shared with Prasar Bharati which, at times, include some kind of advertisements. According to the appellant, the broadcast signal of a sporting event provided by an event organiser, known as the “world feed”, includes the broadcast of the live play of the event as it happens on the field as also certain “features” which enhance a view's experience, such a Hawk-eye, ball delivery speed reference, umpire naming graphics, player statistics, score cards, match summary graphics, replay graphics etc. These features are inserted at the site by or at the instance of the event organiser. Such features invariably contain logos of the event sponsors known as “On-Screen Credits” in industry parlance. These “On-Screen Credits” are, however, included while sharing the live broadcasting signals with Prasar Bharati. Prasar Bharati has taken exception to the aforesaid inclusion treating the same as “advertisements” and, thus, turning it as violative of Section 3(1) of the Sports Act. The appellant, on the other hand, has taken the position that in terms of Section 3(1) of the Sports Act, the obligation of a television Broadcaster, i.e., the appellant, is limited to sharing of the world feed which it receives from the event organizer/owner on as as-is-where-is basis without advertisements of the television broadcaster, and that the appellant is not obliged to remove any On-Screen Credits inserted by the event organizer. The appellant contested the stand of Prasar Bharati (respondent No. 1) that it is the duty of the appellant to ensure that the sponsor logos/On-Screen Credits present in the world feed, which is created by or at the instance of the organizer of the event, have to also be removed by the appellant.
The High Court has found favour with the contention raised by Prasar Bharati.
Finding of the Court:
There is no merit in the appeal.
Result: Appeal dismissed.
JUDGMENT
A.K. SIKRI, J.
Leave granted.
2) The instant appeal is filed against the impugned judgment dated October 3, 2013 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Delhi in W.P.(C) No. 3611 of 2013 which was filed by the appellant herein. The appeal raises the issue regarding the scope of obligations of a Television Broadcasting Organisation under the Sports Broadcasting Signals (Mandatory Sharing with Prasar Bharati) Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as “Sports Act”). We may mention at the outset that under Section 3 of the Sports Act, a Television Broadcasting Organisation is prohibited from carrying the live television broadcast of a sporting event of national importance on cable or Direct-to-Home (DTH) networks in India, unless it simultaneously shares the live broadcasting signals, without its advertisements, with the Prasar Bharati (respondent No.1) to enable it to retransmit the same on its terrestrial and DTH network.
3) In view of the above statutory obligation, the appellant herein sharing the live broadcast signals with respondent No.1 Prasar Bharati and there is no dispute about the same. The appellant, as a television broadcaster, is allowed to insert advertisements on its avenue and recoup its advertisements during a break in live play at various points during broadcast, such as, during breaks between overs in a cricket match, at the fall of a wicket, during drink breaks etc. These advertisements are not included while sharing the live broadcasting signals with Prasar Bharati. No dispute about this as well.
4) The problem has, however, arisen in respect of the contents shared with Prasar Bharati which, at times, include some kind of advertisements. According to the appellant, the broadcast signal of a sporting event provided by an event organiser, known as the “world feed” (as the same feed is provided to all broadcasters the world over), includes the broadcast of the live play of the event as it happens on the field as also certain “features” which enhance a view's experience, such a Hawk-eye, ball delivery speed reference, umpire naming graphics, player statistics, score cards, match summary graphics, replay graphics etc. These features are inserted at the site by or at the instance of the event organiser. Such features invariably contain logos of the event sponsors known as “On-Screen Credits” in industry parlance. These “On-Screen Credits” are, however, included while sharing the live broadcasting signals with Prasar Bharati. Prasar Bharati has taken exception to the aforesaid inclusion treating the same as “advertisements” and, thus, turning it as violative of Section 3(1) of the Sports Act. The appellant, on the other hand, has taken the position that in terms of Section 3(1) of the Sports Act, the obligation of a television Broadcaster, i.e., the appellant, is limited to sharing of the world feed which it receives from the event organizer/owner on as as-is-where-is basis without advertisements of the television broadcaster, and that the appellant is not obliged to remove any On-Screen Credits inserted by the event organizer. The appellant contested the stand of Prasar Bharati (respondent No. 1) that it is the duty of the appellant to ensure that the sponsor logos/On-Screen Credits present ion the world feed, which ios created by or at the instance of the organizer of the event, have to also be removed by the appellant.
5) By the impugned judgment, the High Court has found favour with the contention raised by Prasar Bharati and this view of the High Court is the subject matter of challenge in the instant appeal. The lis has travelled to this Court in following factual background.
6) The appellant (formerly ESPN Software India Private Limited) is the sole and exclusive distributor of some sports channels in India. These include ESPN, Star Sports, Star Sports 2 and Star Cricket. These channels telecast various sporting events such as ICC Cricket, BCCI Cricket, Formula 1, Barclays Premier League Footb
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.