Haryana bans opinion trading apps
Haryana has banned opinion trading apps that allow betting on future events retrospectively from 9 April, according to an official Gazette notification reviewed by Mint.
Prompted by a public interest litigation and subsequent high court intervention, the move renders platforms like Probo, SportsBaazi, and MPL Opinio illegal within the state.
The state government ordered the ban under its Prevention of Public Gambling Act, 2025.
This month, the Chhattisgarh High Court also directed geo-blocking of platforms like Probo, SportsBaazi, and MPL Opinio within the state, though it allowed them to operate elsewhere in the country.
While companies did not immediately respond to media queries, MPL Opinio stopped operations in Haryana earlier this week — before the formal notification bringing the law into force. Though the Act exempts games of skill, it leaves out formats like fantasy sports, raising concerns over legal ambiguity.
The Haryana Prevention of Public Gambling Bill, 2025 is aimed at curbing public gambling, including betting on sports and elections.
One of the key provisions of the Act targets match-fixing and spot-fixing in sports, making such offences punishable with a minimum of three years' imprisonment, which may extend to five years, along with a fine of no less than ₹ 5 lakh. Repeat offenders face harsher penalties, with imprisonment of up to seven years.
However, while the Act was enacted earlier, it has only now been notified.
Previously, the Securities and Exchange Board of India also distanced itself from the opinion trading ecosystem, stating that such platforms do not fall under its regulatory purview.
Despite lingering legal ambiguity, the opinion trading space continues to thrive. Industry estimates suggest that over 50 million users now engage with such platforms, generating nearly ₹ 50,000 crore in annual transaction volumes, with projected revenues of ₹ 1,000 crore for FY25.
Leading platforms like Probo have attracted significant investor interest, raising $28 million from names such as Peak XV Partners, Elevation Capital, and The Fundamentum Partnership. TradeX counts Y Combinator among its backers, while SportsBaazi, originally a fantasy sports operator, has ventured into opinion trading—highlighting the sector's growing appeal.
The Haryana law broadly defines a "bet" as any agreement—oral, written, or otherwise—between parties on the occurrence or non-occurrence of an event with an uncertain outcome, where incorrect predictions result in the loss or payment of a monetary or non-monetary stake.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Justice Janarthanam, a quota warrior, is no more
Chennai: Former judge of Madras high court , Justice M S Janarthanam, known for his work on the reservation front and who had studied and recommended a 3% internal reservation for arunthathiyars among the Scheduled Castes, passed away on Friday. He was 89. Justice Janarthanam served in the high court from 1988 to 1998. He was appointed Tamil Nadu Backward Class Commission chairman in 2006 and served in that role until 2015. Chief minister M K Stalin said Justice Janarthanam would be accorded state honours and that he would personally attend the last rites, in recognition of the judge's contribution to social justice. "It was based on his recommendation that reservation was implemented for Muslims, Christians, and arunthathiyars in Tamil Nadu," Stalin said in a condolence message. Justice Janarthanam headed the state commission for backward classes and also was the one-man commission constituted by then chief minister, M Karunanidhi, to study the educational, social, and economic backwardness of the arunthathiyar community, which was part of the Scheduled Caste category. In Aug 2024, a seven-judge bench of Supreme Court, headed by then Chief Justice of India, Justice D Y Chandrachud, upheld the validity of the Tamil Nadu Arunthathiyars Reservation Act, 2009. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Pinga-Pinga e HBP? Tome isso 1x ao dia se tem mais de 40 anos Portal Saúde do Homem Clique aqui Undo The Tamil Nadu govt had passed the Act based on the recommendation of the commission headed by Justice Janarthanam, providing a 3% internal reservation to the arunthathiyar community within the 18% quota provided for the Scheduled Caste in 2008. The Act brought together seven scheduled castes (SCs) — arunthathiyar, chakkiliyar, madari, madiga, pagadai, thoti, and adi andhra — as arunthathiyars for the sake of reservation on a preferential basis. Justice Janarthanam also served as president of the Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. "He was a firm but gentle human being. I have been associated with him since he was a registrar in Madras high court before his elevation as a judge of the court. His demise is a loss to the legal fraternity," advocate-general P S Raman said. Describing him as a shining example of the chairman of the Tamil Nadu Backward Classes Commission, PMK leader Anbumani Ramadoss said Justice Janarthanam recommended a 10.5% reservation for vanniyars. CPM state secretary P Shanmugam said: "The passing of such a figure is a great loss to both the judiciary and democratic movements fighting for social justice." Get the latest lifestyle updates on Times of India, along with Eid wishes , messages , and quotes !
Mint
4 hours ago
- Mint
Govt proposes mandatory online payment system for copyright licence fees
New Delhi: The Centre has proposed a key change to the copyright regime by making it mandatory for owners and licensors of literary works, musical works and sound recordings to set up an online mechanism for collection of licence fees, as per a notification issued by the commerce ministry on Thursday. The move is aimed at streamlining payments and improving transparency in the way royalties are collected and distributed, especially amid the growing reliance on digital modes of content consumption and public performance. Also read: Reddit says Anthropic used its community to train AI without permission, files lawsuit A notification in this regard has been issued by the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT) under the Ministry of Commerce and Industry on 5 June, seeking public comments on the draft Copyright (Amendment) Rules, 2025 within 30 days, possibly by 4 July. The draft rules insert a new provision—Rule 83(A)—in the Copyright Rules, 2013, requiring that 'all payments of such licence fee shall be processed exclusively through said online system," and explicitly barring any alternative mode of payment. Stakeholders have been given 30 days to submit their objections or suggestions. Any feedback received within this period will be duly examined by the central government before finalizing the rules, the ministry said. The proposal, once finalized, could change the way licensing entities, including copyright societies and aggregators, operate, potentially reducing disputes over manual transactions and non-transparent fee collection. Legal experts said that the amendment reflects a broader policy shift towards digital governance and accountability in the IP rights ecosystem. Also read: Eminem sues Facebook-owner Meta for $109 million over alleged copyright infringement 'The government appears to be moving towards a fully auditable, traceable digital trail for royalty payments, which will benefit both creators and licensees by reducing ambiguity," said Manish K Shubhay, Partner at The Precept-Law Offices. However, questions remain over the operational aspects—whether existing copyright societies will be required to revamp their systems or if the change targets individual right holders. India has seen a steady rise in content licensing for OTT platforms, radio broadcasters, live events, and public performances, making timely and transparent payments a long-standing demand of creators and music labels. On the proposed draft rule, a senior commerce ministry official said that the amendment was designed to 'facilitate efficient royalty flows and curb evasive practices." However, the draft rule does not currently specify the format or standards of the online mechanism, leaving room for further clarifications during the consultation process. 'IPRS welcomes this progressive move aimed at enhancing transparency and streamlining the copyright licensing process. We are pleased to share that IPRS implemented a fully online and digital licensing system nearly five years ago. Today, over 99.5% of our licensing fees for royalties are collected digitally, ensuring ease, accessibility, and transparency for users," said Rakesh Nigam, chief executive officer (CEO) of IPRS (Indian Performing Right Society), a collective rights management organization. Also read: Rahul Matthan: Shield innovation in content creation from intimidation "Our licensing tariffs are publicly available on the IPRS website, enabling users to choose the license best suited to their needs with complete clarity. We also maintain a strict no-cash policy, reinforcing our commitment to transparency and efficiency. This proposed mandate further aligns with the steps IPRS has already taken and will help standardize best practices across the sector for the benefit of creators, users, and the broader copyright ecosystem."
Indian Express
5 hours ago
- Indian Express
US Supreme Court reverses order which provided relief to Government of India in dispute over $1.2 billion award for failed 2005 Devas-Antrix satellite deal
In a setback for the Government of India and Antrix Corporation – a commercial arm of the Indian Space Research Organisation (Isro) – the US Supreme Court has rolled back a reprieve given in 2023 by a US appeals court in a legal battle over a compensation claim of $1.2 billion by start-up firm Devas Multimedia for a failed satellite deal from the year 2005. The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit had ruled on August 1, 2023, that Antrix Corp, as an alter ego of India, must have some amount of business in the US to be subjected to the jurisdiction of US courts under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) of the US. The August 2023 order of the appeals court was expected to end efforts by Devas Multimedia to enforce in the United States a $1.2 billion compensation award made by an arbitration tribunal of the International Chamber of Commerce on September 14, 2015. The award had been confirmed by the US court for the Western District of Washington on October 27, 2020. The US Supreme Court, in an order dated June 5, following a plea by Devas Multimedia against the August 2023 appeals court order, has ruled that the appeals court had erred in its ruling that a firm must have some minimum business in the US for it to be liable to be sued in US courts. The US Supreme Court, which reserved its orders in the matter on March 3, 2025, has stated in its order on Thursday that US courts have jurisdiction over foreign entities 'when an immunity exception applies and service is proper'. 'The FSIA does not require proof of 'minimum contacts' over and above the contacts already required by the Act's enumerated exceptions to foreign sovereign immunity,' the US Supreme Court has ruled while reversing the 2023 order of the appeals court. The US SC has referred the case back to the Ninth Circuit for fresh consideration of the matter. 'Antrix's alternative arguments – that the Fifth Amendment itself requires a showing of minimum contacts, that the claims at issue do not fall within the FSIA's arbitration exception, and that the suit should be dismissed under forum non conveniens – were not addressed below by the Ninth Circuit. This Court declines to address them in the first instance,' the US SC said in its June 5 order. Earlier during the hearing of the case in the US SC, India had asked the court to respect the comity of nations by upholding the August 2023 order for setting aside the $1.2 billion arbitration award against Antrix Corp. 'India has great interest in ensuring that the set-aside decisions, and the Supreme Court of India decision on which they are based, are afforded comity and due respect from the courts of the United States,' said a written submission made by the Government of India to the US SC, ahead of the commencement of an oral hearing on March 3 by the US SC. When the oral arguments in the dispute over the $1.2 billion arbitration award were allowed by a bench of the US Supreme Court on March 3, the counsel for Antrix argued that the case 'serves as an irritant to the Indian government'. The counsel for Antrix Corp, Carter G Philips, said during the oral arguments that the Antrix-Devas agreement of 2005 – which was cancelled for security reasons during the tenure of the UPA government in 2011 – did not have any US interests or anything 'that remotely affects either interstate or foreign commerce'. The Antrix Corp counsel argued that only courts in India could deal with the matter according to the original agreement and that the Supreme Court of India had already set aside the ICC arbitration award in favour of Devas Multimedia. The acting Solicitor General for the US Department of Justice, Sarah M Harris, who argued as an amicus curiae on behalf of the US investors in Devas Multimedia in the US SC said that the US appeals court had erred in ruling that a foreign entity like Antrix Corp should have some minimum contacts in terms of business in the US to be subject to US courts. She said that the US FSIA says 'when personal jurisdiction over a foreign state shall exist and omits any minimum contacts requirement. That is all this court needs to hold to reverse. The Ninth Circuit's contrary statutory holding disregards that text, and no one, even Respondent, appears to defend it.' Following the filing of the case in the US SC against the appeals court order by Devas Multimedia investors, several business bodies like the US Council for International Business, the Chamber of Commerce of the USA and the American Petroleum Institute supported the stand of the investors in Devas Multimedia – that an enterprise does not require to have business interests in the US for federal courts to confirm international arbitration awards. The Ninth Circuit court's order that a foreign entity must have minimum contact or presence in the US to be liable to suits 'undermines (the US) Congress's goal of creating a uniform body of law concerning the amenability of a foreign sovereign to suit in United States courts,' the foreign investors in Devas Multimedia argued. The August 1, 2023, order of the US appeals court was a major relief for Antrix Corp and the Indian government, which is fighting legal battles all over the world in connection with a 2011 decision of the UPA government to annul a satellite deal with Devas Multimedia. Antrix had argued that 'there is no longer an award to enforce because the Delhi High Court – the court of competent jurisdiction to determine the award's enforceability – set it aside, a decision affirmed by the Indian Supreme Court.' The UPA government annulled the 2005 Devas-Antrix satellite deal in February 2011, citing the requirement of space spectrum allocated for the satellite services of Devas for security needs. The deal was cancelled after it was cited as a 'sweetheart deal' and another instance of corruption under the UPA regime after the 2G scam. Under the failed 2005 Antrix-Devas deal, Isro was supposed to lease two communication satellites for 12 years for Rs 167 crore to Devas Multimedia. The start-up was to provide multimedia services to mobile platforms in India using the space band or S-band transponders on Isro's GSAT 6 and 6A satellites. After the NDA government came to power in 2014, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) began seriously investigating the deal, even as the foreign investors in Devas Multimedia – The German telecom major Deutsche Telekom, three Mauritius investors, and Devas Multimedia itself – approached various international tribunals seeking compensation for the failed deal. Devas Multimedia was awarded $1.2 billion by the International Chamber of Commerce on September 14, 2015. Deutsche Telekom was awarded $101 million in compensation by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in Geneva, and the Mauritius investors were awarded $111 million by the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law. The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) in India ordered the liquidation of Devas Multimedia on May 25, 2021, citing fraud in its creation. The NCLT order was upheld by the Supreme Court of India on January 17, 2022.
