iWorld
Comment: India’s NTP 2018 gets digital makeover but needs complimentary policies
Criticism notwithstanding, Indian bureaucratic mandarins—babus as they are referred to in local lingo—do come up with draft policies that are contemporaneous, and at times when it’s least expected. The new digital avatar of the National Telecoms Policy 2018, slated to be operational later this year, could turn out to be just one such initiative—only if the political masters muster enough courage to push through with the proposed legislation and the will to follow up with complementary policies.
Though surprises are the new norms with this government led by the maverick PM Modi—remember the late evening ‘Mitron’ address to the nation by the premier few years back announcing high denomination currency notes were being made illegal—it caught many napping when the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) posted on its website the draft of the much-awaited National Telecommunications Policy 2018 very late in the evening on Labour Day. So, what?
The first surprise element was that the NTP 2018 had been rechristened National Digital Communications Policy 2018 (NDCP). The aim: put the draft in public domain to seek comments from key stakeholders and citizens, at large. But true to the government style—keeping things fluid—the deadline for comments is yet to be announced.
The renaming of the policy was welcomed by the industry as it converges with the overarching Digital India vision of the present government; hiccups along the way to implementation, notwithstanding. However, such tweaks in the suggestions made by the telecoms and broadcast carriage regulator TRAI goes not only beyond just the nomenclature but also attempts to actualise provisions of the policy.
What’s also important that while the government wants synergies between various organisations and ministries, it gives a thumb down to a TRAI proposal to make it—or any such other body—a converged regulator.
A Truly Digital Communications Policy
For quite some time, it was being felt by the government and industry alike that a specific road map is required to guide India’s successful movement into the emerging digital realm—to truly address the issue of convergence in the telecoms and broadcast services. To spark rapid all-round deployment of digital capable technologies, it is necessary all available mechanisms be looked at in a comprehensive manner; basically, shifting the focus from just wired and wireless telephony and broadband and expanding the horizons to areas such as satellite communications and broadcast carriage services.
The industry had been demanding that already existing infrastructure assets in sectors such as broadcast and power be utilised to efficiently achieve a demanding goal of laying down high speed fibre infrastructure across India. Thus, a digital-centric telecommunications policy was required to address the crucial aspect of infrastructure sharing and integration.
Furthermore, to firmly strengthen India’s position in the digital sphere, it is necessary that the web-hosting ecosystem, including data storage, be strengthened by implementing norms and standards that are in conformity with international best practices. This gains importance with increasing reports and instances of data breaches and leaks. Also, core principles such as separation of content/applications and infrastructure/carriage layer underlying network neutrality need to be crystallised and affirmed through statutory and policy provisions.
The present draft NTP 2018—or isn’t it better to call it from now on NDCP 2018? —has taken into account many concerns and challenges and seems like an earnest effort on the part of the government to ensure that India’s broadband and digital sectors are backed by sound policy norms and principles.
Has DoT Planned Well for India’s Digital Future?
The DoT has gone ahead and staked its claim to the entire swathe of telecommunications technologies and the methodologies through which government’s digital goals can be rapidly deployed, e-governance included. Now, this could turn out to be an asset as also a weakness, given inter-departmental politics and power play.
DoT has called for an overhaul of India’s archaic satcom policy in line with international standards and also advocated for greater participation by private players in commercial satellite operations — a vision that needs to be matched with some liberalisation at Department of Space (DoS) and India’s space agency ISRO, both of which report directly to the Prime Minister’s Office. To spearhead the contribution of private satcom industry in providing broadband to far flung districts, there’s specific mention of opening Ka-band for private use and also for utilisation of high through-put (HTS) satellites.
With a view to reducing burden of laying down fresh wireline fibre infrastructure, there’s clear mention of recommendation for “leveraging existing assets of the broadcasting and power sector to improve connectivity, affordability and sustainability”. This could reduce the tendency of telecom industry to overbuild fibre and brings the vast amounts of broadband-capable digital cable infra created under Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB)’s mandate of digitising cable networks across the country and within the purview of Digital India programme.
DoT has also realised the need to formulate a coherent approach to reap the benefit of technological convergence. It has specifically called for statutory amendments to the vintage Telegraph Act, 1885 for “enabling infrastructure convergence of IT, telecom and broadcasting sectors”. This highlights the department wants to create a defined policy structure for seamless use of all broadband capable infrastructure, irrespective of differences amongst sectors. It also reflects clear intent of DoT to focus only on convergence of infrastructure, rather than convergence of applications/media running on this layer.
Therefore, DoT has focused sharply (and some may say appropriately) only on enabling carriage services and the surrounding digital ecosystem rather than delve into other unrelated areas such as media. No wonder it has called for separation of infrastructure/carriage layer from applications/content layer. Moreover, it has called for recognising the need to uphold the core principles of network neutrality by “amending the licence agreements to incorporate the principles of non-discriminatory treatment of content, along with appropriate exclusions and exceptions as necessary”.
Furthermore, the DoT has gone a step ahead and acknowledged the primacy of principles and objectives contained in the National IPR Policy related to telecommunications and sought implementation to kick start development of indigenous IPRs.
The Road to the Final Draft
Though the industry, by and large, has welcomed the draft policy as it gears itself to fulfil the call for the now highly debatable “USD 100 billion” in investments, there are a few asks that still need to be fulfilled. The investment aspect itself is ambitious given the present health of the telecoms sector where a big downside of the business is the pink slips presently being handed out by telcos, big and small.
Another important aspect would be to simplify and streamline all departmental procedures such as windowing of satellite frequencies by the WPC, a part of the DoT, which has been a bottleneck in improving ease of doing business in satcom and broadcasting sectors.
Given that the DoT has already referred to National IPR Policy for the purpose of all IPRs, including patents, trademarks and copyrights, related to telecommunications, it is vital that it settles the debate between carriage and content industries once and for all and pursues the goal of harmonisation of telecom policy construct with the applicable domestic and international IPR regimes.
The key would be to now take all the constructive inputs from the industry and iron out the remaining creases to create an effective implementation framework to turn India into a truly digitally empowered society.
While we debate the National Digital Communications Policy 2018, it would be worthwhile to go back into history and attempt reading the Communications Convergence Bill that was introduced in Parliament in 2001. A real visionary piece of draft legislation, the policy was considered so futuristic at that point of time that a joint parliamentary committee red flagged it at 70-odd places, which effectively sounded the death knell for the proposed legislation that was aimed at promoting and developing the entire communications sector—encompassing the broadcasting, telecom and multimedia sectors—keeping in view emerging convergence of techs and services. Drafted by eminent jurist Fali S Nariman-headed panel, the draft still remains as one of the finest pieces of convergence regulations that never saw the light of the day.
In the end, one cannot but agree with lawyer-researcher at India’s Centre for Internet and Society Anubha Sinha’s observations. Writing for The Wire, an online news venture, Sinha highlighted: “While the policy [NTP 2018/NDCP 2018] is broad and forward-looking, the true intent and meaning of the listed steps will only be understood when complementary legislative and granular policy actions to support these strategies are crystallised. That will make all the difference.”
Also Read :
DoT addresses broadband issues in policy out for public consultation
Zee, Star, NBA oppose converged regulator for broadcast and telecoms
Gaming
India’s new online gaming rules take effect today, banning money games and creating a regulator
The rules, in force from today, separate e-sports from gambling and impose jail terms and stiff fines on violators
NEW DELHI: India’s online gaming sector woke up this morning to a new reality. The Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Rules, 2026, came into force today, May 1st, turning a year of legislative intent into enforceable law. The message from New Delhi is blunt: e-sports and social games are welcome; online money games are not.
The rules operationalise the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming (PROG) Act, passed by Parliament in August 2025. Together, they represent the most sweeping regulatory intervention India has made in its booming digital gaming market, one that generated Rs 23,200 crore in 2024 and is projected to grow at a compound annual rate of 11 per cent to reach Rs 31,600 crore by 2027. The stakes, in every sense, could not be higher.
A sector out of control
The urgency behind the legislation is not hard to find. An estimated 45 crore Indians have been affected by online money gaming platforms, with losses exceeding Rs 20,000 crore. Addiction, financial ruin, money laundering, and suicides have all been linked to the sector. Seventy-seven per cent of the market’s revenues came from transaction-based games, a figure that made regulators deeply uneasy.
The government’s response, effective as of today, is categorical. Online money games, whether based on chance, skill, or any mix of the two, are banned outright. So is their advertising, promotion, and facilitation. Banks and payment processors are barred from handling related transactions. Unlawful platforms can be blocked under the Information
Technology Act, 2000.
The penalties are designed to sting. Offering or facilitating online money games can attract up to three years in jail and a fine of up to Rs 1 crore, or both. Repeat offenders face a minimum of three years, extendable to five, with fines between Rs 1 crore and Rs 2 crore. Advertising such games carries up to two years in prison and fines of up to Rs 50 lakh, with repeat violations attracting higher penalties still. Cyber cell officers at state and union territory levels, including at police station, district, and commissionerate levels, are empowered to investigate offences.
The new sheriff in town
At the centre of the new framework sits the Online Gaming Authority of India, a digital-first regulator constituted as an attached office of the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, headquartered in Delhi. It is chaired by the additional secretary of MeitY and includes joint secretary-level representation from home affairs, finance, information and broadcasting, youth affairs and sports, and law and justice, a deliberately multi-sectoral design built for a complex sector.
The authority’s powers are broad. It will maintain and publish lists of online money games, investigate complaints, issue directions, orders, and codes of practice, hear appeals on user grievances, and coordinate with financial institutions and law enforcement to ensure effective and timely action.
Its decisions on game classification are to be completed within 90 days, a time-bound commitment that industry players have welcomed after years of regulatory ambiguity. Classification can be triggered by the authority acting on its own initiative, by an application from a service provider, or by a notification from the central government. Games will be assessed on objective factors: whether stakes are involved, whether players expect monetary winnings, the revenue model, and whether in-game assets can be monetised outside the game. The outcome is recorded in a determination order specific to the game and provider.
E-sports gets its moment
While the crackdown on money gaming dominates today’s headlines, the rules also carve out a structured path for e-sports and online social games. Registration, required when notified by the central government, applies to all games offered as e-sports and is based on factors including risk to users, scale, financial transactions, and country of origin. A successful application yields a digital certificate of registration with a unique number, valid for up to ten years. Service providers must display registration details, designate a point of contact, comply with data retention requirements, and follow directions on facilitating payments.
Online money games are explicitly ineligible for recognition or registration as e-sports under the National Sports Governance Act, 2025. The separation is deliberate, and the industry has noticed.
Akshat Rathee, co-founder and managing director of NODWIN Gaming, called today’s operationalisation “encouraging,” pointing to publisher-led registration of esports titles and a time-bound determination process as creating “much-needed certainty for all stakeholders.” He added that the “continued emphasis on clearly separating esports from online money gaming is critical in preserving the integrity of competitive gaming as a skill-driven discipline.” He described it as “a proud moment to see official acknowledgement of the broader benefits of responsible esports and gaming, from building confidence, discipline, and teamwork to creating new career pathways for young talent,” and said the framework sets “a strong foundation for the ecosystem to scale in a more structured and globally competitive manner.”
Animesh Agarwal, co-founder and chief executive of S8UL, was equally bullish. “This clarity is critical in unlocking investor confidence and attracting multi-genre brands, while also enabling organisations to take a more long-term view, whether in investing in talent, scaling teams, or building globally competitive formats,” he said, adding that it “strengthens trust among audiences and mainstream stakeholders, positioning esports not just as a sport, but as a fast-growing youth entertainment category in India.”
But Agarwal urged caution on several fronts. There remains limited clarity around financial frameworks, particularly in how esports earnings are treated by banks and financial institutions. A well-defined pathway for the formal recognition or registration of esports teams is still evolving, as are structured player protections. He also called for smoother visa processes for esports athletes competing in international tournaments and for government support in developing infrastructure, including bootcamps, training facilities, and access to high-performance equipment across titles.
Vishal Parekh, chief operating officer of CyberPowerPC India, pointed to downstream effects on education and careers. “With formal recognition and policy backing, colleges and institutions are more likely to take the sector seriously, whether through dedicated esports infrastructure, training programmes, or curriculum integration,” he said, adding that this helps students view gaming as a viable career spanning roles across competitive play, content, game development, and allied industries. He noted that as esports gains prominence in global multi-sport events, the framework strengthens India’s position in international competitive gaming, and called on the ecosystem to provide the right infrastructure and access to high-performance hardware to unlock opportunities in talent development and job creation.
Protecting users, one safeguard at a time
The rules introduce a layered system of user protections calibrated to the risk profile of each game. These include age verification, age gating, time restrictions, parental controls, user reporting tools, counselling support, and fair-play and integrity monitoring. Service providers must disclose their safety features and internal grievance mechanisms when applying for determination or registration.
A two-tier grievance redressal system sits atop these safeguards. Users who are dissatisfied with a platform’s resolution can escalate to the authority within 30 days. The authority aims to dispose of such appeals within a further 30 days. A second appeal lies before the secretary of MeitY, who must also endeavour to resolve matters within 30 days. Enforcement proceedings will be conducted in digital mode wherever possible, with cases targeted for resolution within 90 days from receipt of a complaint.
Penalties under the framework are proportionate, taking into account gain from non-compliance, loss to users, the gravity of the offence, and whether violations are recurring. Mitigation efforts by service providers will also be considered when determining penalties. All penalties imposed under the Act will be credited to the Consolidated Fund of India.
The money follows the rules
For investors and founders, the implications are immediate and significant. Sagar Nair, head of incubation at LVL Zero Incubator, a 100-day sprint designed to accelerate early-stage gaming startups across India, argues that with real-money gaming now prohibited, capital will shift “away from transaction-driven models toward content-led, IP-driven, and global-first gaming businesses.” He acknowledged trade-offs: for operators with exposure to real-money formats, the market becomes more restrictive in the near term. But he argued that by clearly separating esports and non-money gaming from online money gaming, “India is positioning itself as a hub for responsible, creative, and scalable game development.” The opportunity, he said, is “to view India not just as a monetisation-first market, but as a talent, IP, and scale market,” adding that “for founders and investors willing to adapt, this shift could ultimately strengthen India’s position in the global gaming landscape.”
The government frames the wider impact in equally ambitious terms: a boost to India’s creative economy and digital exports, new career pathways for young people, protection for families from predatory platforms, and a stronger voice in global digital governance. India, it argues, offers a model for other countries grappling with the same tensions between gaming’s economic promise and its social risks, one that shows innovation and strong safeguards need not be mutually exclusive.
Whether the framework delivers on those promises will depend on enforcement, always the hardest part. But from today, the architecture is firmly in place: a regulator with teeth, a classification system with deadlines, penalties designed to deter, and a clear dividing line between games that build careers and games that destroy finances. For a sector that has grown fast and governed itself loosely, May 1st, 2026 is the day the free ride ends.
