Why SATRA was formed and why we now hear whispers of its dissolution? In fact, SATRA was a regulatory organization introduced by the state broadcaster, IRIB, for regulating home entertainment platforms.
According to IDEA, the Vaudis Association was opposed to the establishment of the Comprehensive Media Regulations Organization, or SATRA, from the beginning, and their opposition was not unreasonable. Vaudis saw their opposition as a regulatory organization that would compete with them. In other words, why should IRIB create a regulatory organization as a competitor for Vaudis when there are already legal authorities for regulation, such as the National Center for Cyberspace affiliated with the Supreme Council of Cyberspace? However, SATRA was established, and even in its regulatory work, it created legal problems.
Despite the lack of legal standing, SATRA, according to the latest news, has been formed within the Competition Council’s working group on “Digital Economy” with SATRA’s membership.
On the other hand, with a change in SATRA’s management and the sidelining of Saeed Moghiseh and the appointment of Gholamreza Noori as the deputy for cyberspace at IRIB, some believe that SATRA may be dissolved altogether, and IRIB may regulate this area more independently.
Opponents of SATRA have expressed various concerns and viewpoints regarding its existence. Here are some of the statements made by these opponents:
Mohammad Mehdi Asgarpour, the secretary of the Association of Online Video Streaming Companies, states: “A new equation emerged in the past 10 years, resulting in a new type of visual content delivery. The private sector believed that there was a legal provision in the guidance regulations that allowed them to produce series and offer them on DVD while obtaining licenses from the supervisory authority (Ershad).
The situation became even more sensitive as VOD (Video on Demand) services grew. However, I believe that even if VOD services didn’t grow, television would still enter the private sector’s domain. Television managers thought that their audience was the same as the one watching VOD series, or even the creators of TV series claimed that there were more restrictions on television and fewer in the private sector, which disrupted these equations. So, television entered as a contender.”
Mohammad Kashvari, the CEO of the Teyf Group, another opponent of SATRA, says: “The reality is that according to the constitution, IRIB (Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting) has no regulatory authority unless it allows a network to operate and only regulates it.
It is acceptable for someone to sell their content to IRIB; for example, a series or film could be sold to IRIB, and regulatory actions could be taken. However, according to the constitution, it cannot merely act as a regulator for content that comes from elsewhere and is distributed elsewhere. IRIB itself should be the content producer and ultimately have the authority over it.”
Despite the strong opposition from the private sector, SATRA continued to operate. However, the challenges between the private sector and SATRA did not end there. The Competition Council also became involved in their dispute, primarily due to a parallel activity by SATRA, which created a competing regulatory body called the “Competition Council for Audio and Visual Media.”
The Competition Council issued a statement regarding this SATRA initiative, considering it contrary to the law. Recently, SATRA has become a member of the Digital Economy Working Group of the Competition Council, indicating a level of cooperation between the two entities.
There have also been reports of SATRA potentially dissolving, with Saeed Moghiseh, the head of SATRA, reportedly handing over his position to Gholamreza Nouri, the deputy of the digital media department at IRIB. Some speculate that this structural change may signify IRIB’s intentions to gain more control over all digital media platforms under the pretext of “universal audio and video content regulation.”
According to Mohammad Jafar Na’nakar, a legal expert, SATRA lacks any legal validity, and thus, it cannot be legally challenged. He states that SATRA is an illegal entity from a legal perspective. This organization does not have a national identifier, and there is no official decree for its establishment within the government or the IRIB (Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting). Additionally, SATRA lacks articles of association and approval from competent authorities.
Regarding SATRA’s entry into the Digital Economy Working Group of the Competition Council, Na’nakar argues that this was a mistake from a legal perspective. He emphasizes that SATRA does not have any legal standing and should not be allowed to participate in such groups.
He also points out that the regulation of VOD (Video on Demand) services falls under the authority of the National Center for Cyberspace, which is associated with the Supreme Council of Cyberspace and operates based on an approved charter. Any other organization, such as SATRA, should not have a role in regulating this area.
Nanakar emphasizes that in general, an organization must have legal validity, including the approval of its establishment, articles of association, and a national identifier. SATRA lacks all of these legal requirements.
Regarding the private sector’s ability to challenge SATRA, Nanakar mentions that the private sector faces difficulties in presenting a unified front against SATRA. Trade associations alone cannot take legal action, and VOD platforms would need to form an association to collectively voice their concerns. He also notes that SATRA has established its own association, “Raseta,” parallel to existing trade associations, making it challenging for VOD platforms to unite and challenge SATRA’s decisions.
Finally, when asked why VOD platforms have not formed their own association, Mohammad Mehdi Asgarpour, the secretary of the Association of Online Video Streaming Companies, suggests that the formation of such associations involves its own set of challenges. However, he indicates that they have been working on it and may hold a congress to establish an association. Nevertheless, he also mentions that government interference can pose obstacles to the functioning of these associations, as seen in the case of the House of Cinema.
No Comment! Be the first one.