Who controls what you watch: TRAI's new rules for smart TV apps explained

TRAI has proposed an authorisation framework for internet-based TV services that could affect which apps are available on smart TVs

The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) has proposed a new authorisation framework for internet-based television services that could change how viewers access live TV channels through smart TVs. Under the recommendations released on October 26, device manufacturers and operating system providers would have to ensure that only authorised application-based linear television distribution (ALTD) apps are available through their devices and app stores. 

 

The proposal extends the regulatory framework beyond broadcasters and television distribution platforms to the software through which viewers access channels. The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) would maintain a central repository of authorised apps, while service providers would need government authorisation to distribute scheduled television channels over the internet.

 

The recommendations follow a debate over whether internet-based television services should face rules similar to those governing cable and direct-to-home (DTH) operators. Earlier, the issue centred on whether channels available free through smart TV apps should be subject to the same pricing and distribution requirements as channels carried by conventional television operators. TRAI's latest proposals extend that debate to the companies that control the devices and software used to access those channels. 

What are application-based linear television services?

Application-based linear television distribution (ALTD) refers to apps that deliver scheduled television channels over the internet. For example, a viewer could open an app on a smart TV and watch a news channel, a general entertainment channel or a movie channel as part of a scheduled lineup, without using a cable connection or a DTH set-top box.

 

The category includes free ad-supported streaming television (FAST) services, which offer scheduled channels supported by advertising. Unlike services such as Netflix, where viewers choose a film or episode to watch, linear television follows a channel schedule. A viewer tuning in halfway through a programme would join it at that point, as they would on conventional television.

 

In the context of the regulations, the distinction is between an app that brings together television channels and one that primarily offers on-demand video. An app aggregating scheduled channels from different broadcasters over the internet could fall within TRAI's proposed ALTD framework. An app offering films and web series for viewers to select individually would not qualify as ALTD on that basis alone.

 

The recommendations also distinguish ALTD services from certain broadcaster-owned platforms. For example, an app operated by a broadcaster to distribute only its own channels, or those of its parent, subsidiary or holding company, is excluded from the proposed framework. Live streams on social media platforms are also excluded.

Why does TRAI want to regulate these apps?

The immediate concern is the difference in how television channels are distributed over conventional networks and internet-based platforms.

 

Cable and DTH operators operate under a regulatory framework that governs matters such as authorisation, channel distribution, pricing and consumer complaints. Internet-based services can offer scheduled television channels through smart TV apps without necessarily operating under the same distribution framework.

 

This has raised questions about whether the same channel should be subject to different commercial and regulatory conditions depending on how a household watches it.

 

Earlier this year, the debate centred on draft broadcasting rules released by the MIB in June. The rules prompted concerns over whether internet-delivered television could be brought within definitions and distribution requirements designed for conventional broadcasting services. Industry representatives also argued that channels classified as paid on cable and DTH platforms were available free on some smart TV apps.

 

The issue is relevant to the growth of FAST services, which offer viewers scheduled channels without a conventional television subscription. Such services can carry advertising and aggregate channels from different broadcasters, while relying on existing broadband connections and connected devices.

 

TRAI's recommendations seek to establish a separate authorisation category for these services under the broadcasting framework in the Telecommunications Act, 2023. The regulator has proposed a light-touch framework, rather than treating application providers as conventional network operators.

Why are smart TV makers and operating systems involved?

One of the main features of the recommendations is the proposed role for television manufacturers and operating system providers.

 

The MIB would maintain a Master ALTD App Repository, listing authorised applications. Smart TV manufacturers and operating system providers would be required to ensure that only authorised ALTD apps are made available through their devices and application stores. They would also have to submit annual compliance reports to the ministry. 

 

The requirement could affect how viewers discover and install apps that provide live television channels. A service that does not obtain the required authorisation could face restrictions on being made available through the covered devices and app stores, if the recommendations are adopted in their proposed form.

 

For manufacturers, the proposal introduces a compliance obligation linked to the apps supported by their television software. Operating system providers would also have to account for the authorisation status of apps distributed through their stores.

 

The recommendations do not, however, mean that the government would select every programme a viewer can watch or control all video applications on a smart TV. The proposed repository concerns ALTD applications covered by the framework. The rules would also distinguish these services from other forms of online video, including the excluded broadcaster-owned platforms and social media live streams.

Who would need government authorisation?

Under TRAI's recommendations, the application provider would be the primary entity responsible for obtaining authorisation and complying with the framework. The regulator has proposed classifying ALTD as a distinct sub-category under Television Channel Distribution Services in the broadcasting authorisation framework under Section 3(1)(a) of the Telecommunications Act, 2023. 

 

The proposed authorisation would apply nationally and remain valid for an initial period of 20 years, with renewals for successive periods of 10 years. TRAI has recommended an application processing fee of Rs 10,000 and a one-time entry fee of Rs 1 lakh. It has not proposed an authorisation fee, bank guarantee or security deposit for these services. 

The terms and conditions for authorisation would be notified as rules under Section 56 of the Telecommunications Act, 2023. TRAI has also recommended an online portal to handle authorisations, channel registrations and reporting requirements.

 

Application providers would have to distribute only television channels that hold valid permission, authorisation or registration from the Central government. The framework would also allow internet-native linear television channels to be registered through a proposed simplified process, subject to requirements for their names and logos.

What changes for broadcasters and channel owners?

The proposals also set out obligations for broadcasters and content owners whose channels are carried through ALTD applications.

 

The framework would require services to carry only eligible channels, while allowing internet-native linear channels to enter the distribution ecosystem through the proposed registration mechanism. This would establish a separate route for scheduled television content distributed over the internet.

 

The distinction between conventional television distribution and app-based services remains important. A broadcaster may distribute its own channels through a platform that falls within the proposed exclusions, while an independent application that aggregates channels from multiple broadcasters could be covered by the ALTD framework.

 

The recommendations therefore seek to define which entities require authorisation based on the service they provide, rather than applying the same requirements to every app that streams television content.

What protection would viewers get?

TRAI has recommended that the application provider act as the primary point of contact for consumer complaints and grievance redressal relating to ALTD services. This would establish a defined responsibility for handling complaints about the service, alongside the proposed authorisation requirements. 

 

The recommendations also address television audience measurement. Viewership of channels distributed through ALTD applications would be integrated into the television audience measurement framework. Authorised application providers would be permitted to publish anonymised periodic viewership data in accordance with the TV Ratings Policy, 2026.

 

However, the recommendations do not establish that viewers will see fewer advertisements, get access to more channels for free or face lower television bills. Those outcomes would depend on how individual services operate and how the final rules address channel distribution and consumer protection.

Are the recommendations now binding?

No. TRAI has issued recommendations to the government, rather than notifying a final set of rules. The MIB had asked the regulator in December 2025 to examine a framework for FAST services, with the stated objectives of regulatory parity, content accountability and consumer protection.

 

TRAI released a consultation paper on April 6, 2026, and received 207 comments and 11 counter-comments from stakeholders. It also held an open house discussion on June 10 before finalising its recommendations on October 26. 

 

The next step is for the government to consider the recommendations and decide how to proceed with the proposed framework. The final rules will determine the precise obligations for application providers, television manufacturers and operating system providers, as well as the implementation process for the central repository.