Banks must block payments to real-money games under the new Online Gaming Rules, 2026
India’s new Online Gaming Rules, 2026, give the government much tighter control over online gaming platforms, especially those involving money. The key highlight of this development is “user safety features” as an enabling provision. Per the news, regulators can now ask banks and payment providers to stop processing payments for flagged gaming platforms. That means non-compliant platforms can be cut off financially. Gaming platforms will also have to build in basic user protections like age checks, time limits, parental controls, complaint systems, and fair-play safeguards. The new Online Gaming Rules introduce a “litmus test”, as per the MSN reporting, to decide whether a game is a real-money game. MSN report notes that “this test can be triggered in three scenarios: when the authority initiates a review on its own, when a provider offers an e-sports format, or when the government flags certain categories of social games based on factors like the nature, volume, or value of financial transactions involved, or the need to commit funds to participate.” If approved, platforms get a digital registration certificate (valid up to 10 years) and must follow rules like showing registration details, appointing a contact person, keeping data records, handling payments properly, and running grievance systems. Users can first complain to the platform, and if unsatisfied, appeal to the Online Gaming Authority, which must decide within 30 days. See here
Delhi High Court restrains Drishyam 3 producer from creating third-party OTT rights on Amazon Prime’s plea
The Delhi High Court has temporarily blocked Mohanlal’s production house, Aashirwad Cinemas, from selling Drishyam 3’s streaming rights to any OTT platform other than Amazon Prime Video. Amazon told the court it had a 2020 deal, which ‘Amazon Option’ clause, giving it the first right to negotiate streaming rights for future Drishyam films. That meant Aashirwad could not negotiate with another platform before first dealing with Amazon. The dispute began after Amazon learned Aashirwad was considering a third-party OTT offer. Amazon says it began negotiations, but Aashirwad then abruptly ended talks and moved toward other offers. The court has, for now, sided with Amazon and stopped Aashirwad from creating third-party streaming rights for Drishyam 3 until the matter is heard further. The parties are now reportedly trying to settle the dispute, with the next hearing scheduled for May 15. See here
Centre Asks Zee5 to Hold Back ‘Lawrence of Punjab’ Over Law-and-Order Concerns
The Centre has asked Zee5 not to release Lawrence of Punjab, a documentary series on jailed gangster Lawrence Bishnoi, which was scheduled to release on April 27. The advisory came after proceedings in the Punjab and Haryana High Court and concerns raised by the Punjab government that the series could glamorise gangster culture, influence young viewers, and undermine anti-gang enforcement efforts in the state. According to the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, the show risks normalising organised crime, weakening law enforcement messaging, and disturbing public order in Punjab. Punjab Police said it had formally asked the Centre to stop the release under Section 69 of the IT Act, which allows the government to block online content in certain cases. See here
Supreme Court on Music Royalties: No Contempt Without Prior Quantification of Dues
A very interesting ruling came from the Supreme Court this week. The Supreme Court has refused to interfere with the Madras High Court’s ruling that contempt proceedings cannot be used to force payment of music royalties unless the amount due has first been clearly calculated. With this decision, the position laid down by the Madras High Court’s Division Bench, that nonpayment of an unquantified amount cannot constitute wilful disobedience sufficient to invoke contempt jurisdiction, now continues to hold the field. As I understand, the case has a long history. It arose from royalty disputes between music companies and FM radio broadcasters like Radio Mirchi and Radio City. Music labels tried to use contempt proceedings to recover unpaid royalties, but the court held this was not legally permissible because the earlier order fixed only the royalty rate, not the final amount payable. The Court clarified that non-payment of an unquantified amount is not “wilful disobedience” and therefore cannot trigger contempt. The correct way is to first quantify the dues and then recover them through ordinary execution proceedings. Read about the case in detail here.
IBDF Backs New TV Ratings Norms, Seeks More Time for Implementation
The Indian Broadcasting and Digital Foundation (IBDF) has backed the government’s new TV ratings rules, but says the rollout timelines are too tight. The broadcasters’ body supports the reforms in principle, especially bigger audience panels, cross-screen measurement, and tighter governance at BARC. But it has asked for more time to implement them. Its main concerns are indeed pragmatic. Six months is too short to expand BARC’s sample size, 30 days is too little to restructure its board, and cross-screen ratings will be difficult without viewership data from platforms like YouTube, Netflix, and Meta. IBDF has also backed removing “landing page” viewership from ratings, but says that the responsibility for reporting that data should not fall only on rating agencies. See more here.
