I&B Ministry
MIB secy Amit Khare advocates self-regulation in media
MUMBAI: Making a strong case for self-regulation, Ministry of Information & Broadcasting Secretary Amit Khare today said it was a better regulatory approach for India’s media and entertainment sector.
With the advancement as well as convergence of technologies, the government would like to have more of content self-regulation by the sector, rather than the state acting as a monitor, Khare said allaying fears that the present government would strongly push for mandated rules and regulations related to content.
Peer pressure will serve to make self-regulation effective and ethically driven, the senior government official said while taking part in a panel discussion here on co-creation of a favourable regulatory framework for new and emerging media that had been organised by a media house.
Khare observed that the media and entertainment industry in India is one of the fastest growing industries and the sector sector plays an important role in job creation and providing employment to more than 1 million people. Further, for every rupee spent in the sector, there is a multiplier effect of around 2.9, he added highlighting the importance of the sector.
Pointing out that media regulations historically have been developed more from the point of view of the medium or platform of distribution and not from the point of view of content itself, Khare said the situation has led to legacy players in print and electronic media coming under the ambit of ambit of regulation, leaving unregulated some newer media forms such as OTT services.
Stating that the government has an open mind on regulation, the MIB official divulged that debates are on within the government whether there is a need to regulate unregulated platforms (like OTT) or whether to reduce overall regulations in the traditional sectors too. “How much regulation is required and how is it to be done, is another matter that needs to be addressed,” he added.
According to him, FDI policies are being liberalised to make India a more investor-friendly market, but monopolies should be avoided.
Khare’s fellow panelists included Alok Srivastava, MD – IoT, Southeast Asia & India, CISCO, Gowree Gokhale, Senior Partner, Nishith Desai Associates law firm and Vivek Krishnani, MD, Sony Pictures Entertainment India.
I&B Ministry
India turns up the heat on piracy, orders Telegram to axe 3,142 channels and blocks 800 websites
New legal teeth, nodal officers and notices to intermediaries signal that the government is done playing nice with copyright thieves
NEW DELHI: India’s war on film piracy just got significantly more aggressive. The government has ordered Telegram to remove 3,142 channels distributing pirated content, blocked access to around 800 websites through internet service providers, and put the full weight of freshly sharpened legislation behind the crackdown. The message from New Delhi is unambiguous: the free ride for copyright thieves is over.
Minister of state for information and broadcasting L. Murugan spelled out the legal architecture to the Lok Sabha on Wednesday. The Cinematograph (Amendment) Act, 2023, he said, now contains specific provisions designed to make piracy a genuinely painful proposition. Sections 6AA and 6AB prohibit unauthorised recording and transmission of films, with violations attracting a minimum of three months’ imprisonment and a fine of Rs 3 lakh. At the upper end, offenders face three years behind bars and fines of up to 5 per cent of a film’s audited gross production cost — a figure that, for a big-budget production, could run into crores.
The legislation also gives the government powers to act against intermediaries hosting infringing content, by notifying them under Section 79(3) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, and compelling takedowns and blocking actions. Under Section 79(3)(b), intermediaries are legally required to remove or disable access to unlawful content upon receiving government notice or court orders. The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, add a further layer of obligation, requiring platforms to ensure their services are not used to host or distribute content that violates copyright or proprietary rights.
To put enforcement into practice, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting has established a dedicated institutional mechanism, complete with nodal officers to receive complaints. Copyright holders, authorised representatives or individuals can report piracy through a prescribed format, after which the government issues notices to intermediaries to disable access to infringing links.
The most headline-grabbing action came on 11 March 2026, when Telegram was formally notified under Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act and directed to remove and disable 3,142 channels found to be distributing unauthorised content belonging to OTT platforms, content owners and producers. The complaints that triggered the action came from OTT platforms including JioCinema and Amazon Prime Video, which alleged that copyrighted films, web series and other material were being shared on the platform on a massive scale. Telegram’s architecture, with its large file-sharing limits and capacity for user anonymity, has made it a favoured vehicle for exactly this kind of large-scale piracy.
The Telegram action sits within a broader pattern of escalating enforcement. Just days before the Lok Sabha statement, the ministry banned five OTT platforms for streaming obscene content: MoodXVIP, Koyal Playpro, Digi Movieplex, Feel and Jugnu. In July 2025, the Centre ordered the blocking of 25 OTT platforms accused of streaming obscene, vulgar or pornographic material, a list that included ALTT, ULLU, Big Shots App, Desiflix, Boomex, Navarasa Lite, Gulab App, Kangan App, Bull App, Jalva App, ShowHit, Wow Entertainment, Look Entertainment, Hitprime, Feneo, ShowX, Sol Talkies, Adda TV, HotX VIP, Hulchul App, MoodX, NeonX VIP, Fugi, Mojflix and Triflicks.
Rule 3(1)(b) of the IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, provides the regulatory hook for those actions, prohibiting platforms from hosting content that is obscene, pornographic, invasive of privacy, gender-harassing, racially or ethnically objectionable, or that promotes hatred and violence.
For an industry that loses billions of rupees annually to piracy, the direction of travel is welcome. The question, as always, is not whether the laws exist, but whether the enforcement machinery can keep pace with the ingenuity of those determined to circumvent it. Three thousand channels down, and the pirates are already busy opening three thousand more.
