MPL vs ASCI: Defamation notice to ASCI more about optics than legal merit, say experts
Galactus Funware Technology, MPL’s parent company, issued a ₹50 crore legal notice to ASCI, accusing it of defamation and loss of goodwill over its whitepaper titled ‘Examining Opinion Trading in India’.
ADVERTISEMENT
Galactus Funware Technology, the parent company of online gaming platform MPL (Mobile Premier League), has issued a legal notice to the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI). However, legal experts have cast serious doubt on the defamation case filed by MPL against ASCI, calling it a strategic move lacking legal substance.
Galactus Funware Technology, MPL’s parent company, issued a ₹50 crore legal notice to ASCI, accusing it of defamation and loss of goodwill over its whitepaper titled ‘Examining Opinion Trading in India’. The company alleges the report is “biased and unsubstantiated,” claiming ASCI edited and tampered with MPL’s advertisements to depict opinion trading as risky and potentially financially harmful.
However, lawyers say the case doesn’t meet the legal thresholds required for defamation. Siddharth Chandrashekhar, Advocate at the Bombay High Court, “Legally the case of MPL does not hold any legal water. This attempt looks more strategic rather than being substantial. As a self regulatory body which acts in public interest is protected by qualified privilege.”
Chandrashekhar said, “The defamation case requires malice and falsehood both of which are missing in this case. This appears to be more aimed at silencing regulatory scrutiny rather than defending themselves. They are framing themselves as a victim of some defamatory statement and this is more an attempt to control the narrative before SEBI or any other strong regulatory body steps in.”
Another legal counsel on condition of anonymity said, “Defamation cases for such whitepapers focused on an industry does not stand ground in the court of law. When you look at the ASCI report, the advertisements which does not meet standards under the ASCI guidelines and its codes have been flagged. The motive or malice for such cases are crucial which is clearly missing in this matter.”
The legal notice also challenges ASCI’s authority, asserting that its charter does not empower it to comment on the legality of any industry’s operations. ASCI, in response, said: “We are in receipt of the notice and there is absolutely no question of tampering.”
MPL had to cease operations of 'Opinio' in Haryana following rising legal pressures on opinion trading platforms. This move comes in the wake of a growing regulatory crackdown, with a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed in the Punjab and Haryana High Court seeking an immediate ban on such platforms, including restrictions on their advertising and promotional activities.
The updated Terms and Conditions on MPL Opinio, explicitly prohibit users in Haryana from participating in "formats that pertain to events whose outcome is unknown," including both MPL Opinio and MPL Fantasy games. The statement reads, "Formats that pertain to events whose outcome is unknown, specifically MPL Opinio and MPL Fantasy, shall not be used by users located in the state of Haryana.
Opinion trading platforms SportsBaazi, Probo and TradeX have been banned in the state of Chhattisgarh. While they now have stopped operations in Haryana as well. Tamil Nadu government has also sent notices to opinion trading platforms and continue to be under regulatory pressure.
The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has issued a public advisory warning investors against engaging with Opinion Trading Platforms. These platforms, according to SEBI, allow users to enter into arrangements where payouts are determined by the outcome of a yes/no proposition—essentially betting on the occurrence or non-occurrence of future events.
SEBI emphasized that such platforms often mimic legitimate investment avenues by using financial market terminology like "profits," "stop loss," and "trading," which may mislead users into believing they are participating in regulated securities markets.
In its official statement, SEBI clarified that these platforms generally do not fall under its regulatory purview as the underlying activity does not involve trading in securities. Consequently, no investor protection mechanisms applicable to securities markets would cover transactions made on these platforms.
The regulator further noted that since these platforms are neither recognized stock exchanges nor registered with SEBI, any trading of securities—if it occurs on these platforms—would be considered illegal. In such cases, both the platforms and their participants may face regulatory action.
Storyboard18 has reached out to MPL for comment. The story will be updated if and when a response is received.
