Do me a favour, let’s play Holi! But, before you grab those colors, let’s quickly dip our toes into the tech updates for this month. We’re diving headfirst into the controversy surrounding Ranveer Allahbadia and the India’s Got Latent show — plus how it’s stirring up a conversation about content regulation. We’ve also got a slew of AI announcements, some digital competition updates, online gaming news, and more. Oh, and did we mention that the courts were pretty involved with tech this month? Yeah, things are intense. Hold tight — this issue is bursting with colorful updates!
Source: Meme by Ikigai Law
Deep-Dive
Comedy turned dramedy
A clip from India’s Got Latent, hosted by Samay Raina, went viral. In the clip, guest panellist Ranveer Allahbadia, was seen asking a ‘would you rather’ question to a contestant on the show, which ignited a massive uproar. Many called Ranveer’s remarks offensive, obscene and inappropriate.
A rollercoaster of reactions
- Politicians say: Maharashtra’s Chief Minister criticized Allahbadia’s remarks and the show, calling out that freedom of speech should not encroach on the freedom of others. Member of parliament (MP) Priyanka Chaturvedi and MP Sasmit Patra, who are members of the parliament’s specialised Standing Committee on Information Technology (SCIT), said they’d bring up the matter to the committee and discuss potential for a new framework to regulate such online content.
- Police, police everywhere: Multiple FIRs were filed in the states of Maharashtra, Assam, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan against creators, Ranveer Allahbadia and other guests who have appeared on the show, for using obscene and vulgar content on the show.
- Make room for rights: Rights-based government agencies like the National Human Rights Commission and National Commission for Women (NCW) termed content on the show a highly objectionable to women and children and asked for the show to be taken down. Ranveer Allahbadia and a few others associated with the show appeared before the NCW to make their statements.
- Just a friendly reminder: The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) issued an advisory acknowledging the multiple complaints it has received regarding the spread of vulgar content online. It also reminded content platforms to comply with their obligations under the Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code (IT Rules, 2021) and adhere to the Code of Ethics.
- MIB, enters the chat: SCIT asked MIB (and the IT ministry) about potential changes in the law to address controversial content on new media platforms. In its reply, MIB expressed concern over misuse of freedom of expression for obscene and violent content and reportedly said they will get back to the SCIT after further deliberation on the issue.
Supreme Court relief, but with a catch...
Faced with a barrage of FIRs, Allahbadia approached the Supreme Court of India, seeking consolidation of FIRs and interim protection from arrest.
On February 18, 2025, the court granted Allahbadia interim relief, if he cooperates with investigations. However, this was not without characterising his comments as dirty, perverted, disgusting and said he was trying to attain cheap publicity.
During the proceedings, the judge called out that there were no content warnings/ disclaimers and no precautions in place — to which the podcaster’s lawyer clarified that the viral clip was in fact restricted to paid adult subscribers. The controversy erupted from a 10-second video clip (out of a 45-mins show), which was recorded and leaked by a subscriber.
Ranveer was also asked to not host or air any new episodes of his podcast. On March 3, 2025, this changed after the court considered the ban’s impact on the podcaster’s 280 employees’ livelihood. However, this ban was lifted only conditional to Ranveer adhering to ‘standards of morality and decency’ suitable for all age groups.
Notably, during the court hearings, the highest law officer of the country, the Solicitor General remarked that some kind of guidelines were required to regulate vulgar and obscene speech online. Taking this suggestion forward, the Bench urged the Central Government to propose a regulatory measure that avoids outright censorship.
Muddied waters?
The court’s ask is to regulate offensive/obscene content online — for OTT content as well as user-generated content (UGC). But here is where it gets muddied. OTT content is governed under a code of ethics and safeguards for digital media under Part-III of the IT Rules, 2021 (parts of which were stayed by the Bombay and Madras High Court in 2021); while UGC is regulated under various speech related provisions under the IT Act and the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita. Online intermediaries, under Part-II of the IT Rules, moderate user content as they comply with due diligence obligations. The ball is now in the government’s court to see what fresh regulations come about and who they focus on: OTT, intermediaries or users?
The ripple effect
Samay Raina took down all the episodes of India’s Got Latent. Ranveer Allahbadia had stopped posting content, pursuant to court orders. Some panellists associated with the show have been dealing with death and rape threats. Not to mention all the online trolls.
This episode has had a knock-on effect on brands and their relationship with content creators, with brands becoming wary, and creators losing out on sponsorship deals. Influencers are reporting a drop in rates for brand deals due to increased scrutiny by marketing teams on partnering with creators and evaluating past content.
Comedians like Anubhav Singh Bassi’s shows were cancelled in Lucknow, due to Uttar Pradesh State Women’s Commission raising concerns over the use of inappropriate language.
It isn’t only an economic impact. Creators are now likely to operate with a higher degree of self-censorship. Some content creators are already lawyering up, and going through their past content worried about not crossing any line.
Tightrope act ahead
As the dust on the drama settles, the Indian government will be walking a tightrope between two big goals: fostering a thriving creative economy (particularly in the Audio-Visual and Gaming sectors (AVGC) — with the WAVES summit coming up) and regulating speech that is within constitutional freedoms but may offend public sentiment.
This tug-of-war between supporting the freedom of speech and creativity of content creators while ensuring that offensive content doesn’t cross the line of reasonable restrictions will likely shape India's digital content landscape for years to come.
Connecting the Dots
Happy birthday IndiaAI!
IndiaAI just turned one! To commemorate the occasion, IT Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw unveiled AIKosha and the AI Compute Portal. The former offers a smorgasbord of ethically sources datasets to give AI developers something to work with that doesn’t involve relying on foreign data. The Compute Portal? 10,000 GPUs ready to go at a subsidized rate. Plus, it's also set to help India develop its very own foundational AI model — 67 applications for which are already in queue. We can’t wait to see if we can turn this into the next big thing, or at least the next big "hello world" project doesn’t involve relying on foreign data. The Compute Portal? 10,000 GPUs ready to go at a subsidized rate. Plus, it's also set to help India develop its very own foundational AI model — 67 applications for which are already in queue. We can’t wait to see if we can turn this into the next big thing, or at least the next big "hello world" project.
Source: Reader’s Digest
Game over with new rules?
Tamil Nadu’s gaming authority has rolled out a whole new set of rules that are shaking up the world of real-money gaming. Picture this: A night curfew from midnight to 5 AM (because who needs to game after 12, right?), spending limits on your gaming account (bye-bye, spontaneous rummy night), and KYC checks using Aadhaar (don’t try to fake it). Platforms must also now issue pop-up reminders if you’ve been playing for too long — basically turning gaming into your mom telling you to go to bed at 10 PM. Earlier, the deadline for compliance was immediately from the publication of the notification in mid-February, but this was extended by six weeks — and the new deadline is March 26, 2025.
Not everyone seems to be on board with these rules. Some gaming platforms have raised concerns on implementation and cried foul, calling these regulations unconstitutional. They’ve taken their grievances all the way to the Madras High Court.
Quick commerce turning into quick court battles
The q-commerce world (think Blinkit, Instamart, Zepto) is under scrutiny, as 400,000 distributors (through their representative body All India Consumer Products Distributors Federation (AICPDF)) have filed an antitrust case accusing q-commerce platforms of predatory pricing and pushing small retailers out of business. Things are getting spicy — Zomato and Swiggy were already under regulatory radar over their food delivery operations.
From the courtrooms to your inbox:
- Blocking cartoons, not websites: Tamil media platform, Ananda Vikatan’s political satire — featuring Prime Minister Modi and former US President Trump — was too spicy for the government’s taste. MIB pulled the plug on the magazine’s website, citing concerns over India’s sovereignty and foreign relations. Vikatan took the case to the Madras High Court, arguing that only the offending cartoon should be axed, not the entire website. The court granted interim relief and ordered that the website could be restored once the cartoon was removed. Now, Ananda Vikatan must shoot an email to the government confirming the removal of the cartoon. After that, the block will be lifted. The next hearing is on March 21, 2025.
- Big bad blocking rules face challenge: Civil society organisation Software Freedom Law Center (SFLC) filed a public interest litigation (PIL) challenging the constitutionality of Rule 8, 9 and 16 of the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public) Rules, 2009 (the Blocking Rules). SFLC has argued that these provisions allow the government to block online content without notifying the original creators or allowing them an opportunity to be heard – which is against the principles of natural justice. Therefore, in practice, intermediaries comply with government blocking orders by immediately taking down content, leaving creators without prior notice, a reasoned order, a grievance mechanism, or an opportunity to contest the decision. The Supreme Court has now issued notice to the government in the matter.
- The A and I clash continues: Here’s the tea: News Agency, Asian News International (ANI) filed a suit against OpenAI alleging two claims. First, that OpenAI scraped ANI’s original data to train its generative AI chatbot Chat GPT for commercial gain. Second, that OpenAI tarnished ANI’s reputation by attributing fabricated news to it.
During the Delhi High Court’s first hearing, OpenAI objected on jurisdiction — highlighting that OpenAI has no physical office or servers in India. Both the amici (aka appointed experts to assist the court): namely, Advocate Adarsh Ramanujan and Prof. Dr. Arul George Scaria are of the view that the Delhi High Court has jurisdiction to hear this case, since ChatGPT’s services are accessible to users in Delhi and ANI operates in Delhi (Indian copyright law allows suits to be filed where an entity resides and conducts business).
However, the amici disagree whether OpenAI is actually in the wrong for copyright infringement. Dr. Scaria is of the opinion that OpenAI is just analyzing and learning from ANI’s content, not stealing it; while, Advocate Ramanujan maintains that copying or storage of copyrighted material even for training purposes, amounts to infringement. Of late, it seems like everyone wants in on the matter — Digital News Publishers Association (DNPA) (representing news media organizations like Hindu, Indian Express), Federation of Indian Publishers (representing global and Indian book publishers like Cambridge University Press, S.Chand and Co.), policy think tank Indian Governance and Policy Project (IGAP) and generative AI start up FluxLabs, have all filed interventions applications, to present their views on this hot button issue. The next hearing is scheduled for March 28 and April 2, 2025 where the parties will continue to battle it out. You can read more about the case here. A deep dive in this case will come soon! - Don’t seek it, if you don’t like it: A petition seeking a ban on the Chinese-developed AI chatbot, DeepSeek, was filed in the Delhi High Court. The petitioner alleged that DeepSeek’s launch on app stores was followed by major security vulnerabilities, leading to leaks of sensitive personal data, including chat history, back-end data, and log streams. However, during the February 25, 2025 hearing, the court refused to expedite the case, stating it would take up the matter in March. The court has warned users that if they find it harmful, maybe just... don’t use it?
Reading Reccos
- Gautam Bhatia’s blog about the Supreme Court’s latest order pre-emptively inviting online censorship, in Ranvir Allahbadia’s case.
- Rest of World’s in-depth reportage offers a compelling big-picture perspective on how policymakers around the world are approaching AI governance.
Shout-outs!
- Our colleagues Aarya and Rutuja Pol have written about India’s AI Safety Institute in The Hindu.
- Astha Srivastava was quoted in MediaNama sharing her views on ticket re-selling online.
That’s all for now!
We’d love to hear your feedback, concerns or issues you’d like us to cover. Or, you could just drop in to say hi. We are available at contact@ikigailaw.com. Follow us on LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter to catch up on updates.
Signing off, the Ticker team for this edition: Nehaa Rahil Pallavi Vidushi Nirmal
