MEITY’s Draft Rules: Why 'One Size Fits All' Approach May Not Work
What used to be fairly innocent entertainment for kids and teens is now the subject of government regulation.
advertisement
What used to be fairly innocent entertainment for kids and teens is now the subject of government regulation.
Today, we take online gaming for granted. While casual games still tend to be solitary pursuits, most games that require more than casual attention tend to be online.
You’re unlikely to find a millennial or younger person that hasn’t heard of PUBG, or Fortnite or a myriad other “battle royale” style games that now exist. Online games allow players to use the network – usually the internet – to compete against each other in entirely new and purpose-built formats of games. These have, in fact, spawned the entirely new ‘e-sports’ genre. And the government has taken notice.
E-sports are now a matter to be considered by the Ministry of Sports. All other “online games” are now regulated by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MEITY). But does the term “online games” need a sharper definition? We think so!image courimage courtesy:
Image courtesy: istock
Not all online games need to be regulated the same way
On January 2, 2023, MEITY released a draft set of rules to be amended to the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021. The move has been hailed by the industry, which has faced challenges in terms of its perception and legality for a long time.
The rules are intended to apply to “online games” which are defined as games that are accessed using a computer resource and require a deposit with the expectation of winning a prize pool. This seems reasonably clear on the surface, but there is enough ambiguity for questions to be raised. MEITY is in the process of public consultations with online gaming stakeholders and industry until the end of January, after which they expect to notify the rules.
One of the concerns raised has come from the traditional gaming industry, that sees the definition of “online game” to be generic and overly broad. In this current definition, it also applies to casual gaming and games with in-app purchases and rewards- something like a fruit ninja or a candy crush, which may not be ideal.
In fact, the draft rules are chiefly intended for the burgeoning online Skill Game sector when played for winnings, which includes games like Rummy and Fantasy Sports. The rules lay down stringent mandates for grievance redressal, compliance, KYC norms and regulations for transparency and Self-Regulatory Bodies (SRBs) to largely manage the processes of regulating “intermediaries”, as gaming platforms are now designated.
Image courtesy: istock
A need for definition
Many of these rules have been crafted for the safety and protection of online gamers who play skill games with stakes. Therefore the definition must clearly contain all the elements that are essential for a game to be qualified as such i.e prize pool, entry amount, platform fee/ service fee etc.
Online games such as PUBG or even competitive Chess therefore are not relevant to be included within the ambit of these rules, currently. This is not to say that games with in-app purchases do not require regulation or oversight. However, the intent of rules currently is to restrict the same to online skill games played for stakes.
A sharper definition can actually help build a strong distinction between legitimate skill gaming industry and gambling/ betting and help define the role of the states in a better manner.
(At The Quint, we question everything. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member today.)