Free, ad-supported live TV apps are about to face a distribution-shaped rulebook. The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India has recommended that services such as Samsung TV Plus, YuppTV and Xiaomi’s TV+ obtain a government authorisation before they can operate in India.
The proposal
The recommendation, released on October 26, treats these apps as “Application-based Linear Television Distribution” services and brings them under the Telecommunications Act, 2023. TRAI says the Act’s definition of a “message” already covers video streams, so scheduled channels delivered over the internet are a telecom service even though the government keeps on-demand OTT under the IT Act.
The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, which asked for the framework in December 2025, will decide whether to accept it. TRAI had opened a consultation in April 2026.
Who is in and who is out
The framework targets linear channels: programming that plays on a fixed schedule rather than letting viewers choose what to watch. Many are free, ad-funded FAST services that come pre-installed on smart TVs. TRAI’s definition covers apps, websites and similar interfaces across devices.
- Broadcasters’ own apps, social media live streams and on-demand services such as Netflix stay outside.
- Apps would need a 20-year national licence, renewable for 10 years, with a Rs 10,000 processing fee and a Rs 1 lakh entry fee.
- Only Indian companies or LLPs could apply; foreign players would need an Indian entity.
- All user, payment and viewing data would have to be stored on servers in India.
What changes for channels and app stores
Licensed apps could carry only approved channels, registered internet-only channels and their own channels. Internet-native linear channels would pay Rs 1 lakh a year to register for 10 years, versus Rs 5 lakh a year for a non-news satellite TV channel. They would follow the Programme Code and Advertising Code and keep recordings for 90 days. Internet-only news channels would not get this lighter route; they would need the same permission as TV news channels, including security clearance.
TV makers and operating system providers would not need a licence, but would have to check apps against an MIB-managed “Master ALTD app repository,” remove unlicensed apps immediately and file an annual compliance report. Broadcasters could supply channels only to licensed apps. Existing services would get one year from notification to comply.
Why this matters now
This is more than a compliance story. FAST is a growing, low-cost reach play for advertisers because it puts scheduled channels on connected TVs without cable distribution costs. A licensing regime could raise entry costs, thin the channel line-up and shift reach back towards licensed distributors.
For media planners, the immediate risk is reach estimate volatility: if unlicensed apps are removed from smart TVs or channel line-ups shrink, campaigns built on FAST inventory will need quick reallocation.
The data-localisation clause is the sharper operational issue. TRAI says the DPDP Act does not mandate local storage for all personal data, but it wants viewing history, preferences and recommendations held in India so authorities can access records. That creates an infrastructure question for every app operator, even before MIB finalises rules.
TRAI has not decided pricing, subscription rules or quality standards; it wants viewing on these apps to count towards TV ratings later.
What to watch
The open questions are where the telecom definition stops, how hybrid services with both live and on-demand content are treated, and how government access to viewing data is safeguarded. Jio Platforms has argued FAST is a form of OTT; Sony has said the framework exceeds TRAI’s remit. TRAI calls the internet-delivery argument “misplaced.”
If accepted, the terms would be notified under Section 56 of the Telecommunications Act, 2023. For now, the practical move is simple: map every FAST app and internet-only channel in your plan or portfolio, and treat the one-year window as the real deadline.
Source: MEDIANAMA
