Summary

  • TRAI proposes a distinct authorisation category for apps that distribute scheduled TV channels over public internet and IP networks.
  • Its plan gives MIB a master app repository, puts device and OS makers on app-access checks, and makes the app provider the first consumer-complaint desk.

The TV remote has always looked like a small piece of plastic with a large opinion of itself. TRAI’s new recommendation gives the device around it a more official job: help decide which internet-TV apps reach the screen.

On 26 October, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India recommended treating Application-based Linear Television Distribution services as a distinct sub-category under Television Channel Distribution Services in the broadcasting authorisation framework of section 3(1)(a) of the Telecommunications Act, 2023. The category covers apps, websites and similar interfaces that aggregate scheduled channels and deliver them over the public internet or other IP networks to connected devices. The release also includes approved internet-native linear channels and an app provider’s own platform-service channels in the proposed definition. TRAI’s recommendation release; Telecommunications Act, 2023.

The mechanism is more interesting than the acronym. The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting would maintain a “Master ALTD app repository”. Television manufacturers and other original-equipment makers, along with operating-system providers, should make only authorised ALTD apps available and file annual compliance reports with the ministry. In plain English: the app-store shelf gets a government-maintained guest list.

That moves a piece of broadcasting policy into the places where viewers install software. A channel’s route to a living-room screen would run through its own authorisation or registration, the app provider that packages it, and the device or OS layer that makes the app available. TRAI says an ALTD provider should carry only channels with valid central-government permission, authorisation or registration. It also recommends a simple registration route for internet-native linear channels. Each step has a different owner; the proposal’s practical test is whether the repository makes those checks clear enough for all of them to perform.

TRAI started this work after the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting referred FAST services to it on 15 December 2025, asking for a framework addressing parity, content accountability and consumer protection. The regulator issued a consultation paper on 6 April 2026, received 207 comments and 11 counter-comments, then held an open-house discussion on 10 June. Those counts show a consultation process, not agreement. On 26 October, TRAI released its recommendations; the release describes a proposal, not an adopted operating rule. TRAI release as published by the Press Information Bureau.

The complaint channel stays with the app provider. TRAI recommends that it serve as the primary point of contact for consumer complaints and grievance redressal relating to the service. That assignment makes sense to a viewer who opens one app to watch channels from several sources: the app is the visible service desk. Behind the desk, however, a failure might sit with a channel’s permission, the app’s distribution choice, the device’s listing or the network carrying the stream. The framework will need a clean handoff if the first inbox is not the last responsible party.

Audience measurement gets a new route too. TRAI recommends integrating viewership of channels distributed through ALTD apps into the television audience-measurement framework. Authorised app providers should be allowed to publish anonymised periodic viewing data under the TV Ratings Policy, 2026. That could make app-based linear viewing more legible to the ratings system; the release does not supply an implementation timetable, measurement method or compliance-cost estimate.

The source record is unusually clear about the proposed responsibilities and quiet about the operating economics. There is no fee schedule or launch date in TRAI’s press-release summary. Those details will matter to a service deciding whether the authorization route is a modest filing or another permanent line in the budget.

For now, the key market change is institutional: an app is no longer treated only as a screen-shaped shortcut to television. In TRAI’s proposal it becomes a distribution service with an authorisation path, a complaint obligation and a place in audience measurement. The app store gets the guest list. The app provider gets the complaints. The ratings system gets the audience. The real test is whether the final rules let those three desks pass a problem to the right one before the viewer reaches for the remote.