We analyse some key recent developments in the video game and gambling sectors.
Sign up to our Technology, Media & Communications updates to receive gaming news directly in your inbox:
Laura Craig looks at the recent success of screen adaptations of games and the impact that can have on sales of the video games themselves.
Translating video games to the screen has historically been seen as a risky venture, with poor box office performance and critical reception. Recently, the tide has changed. 2023 was the highest grossing year ever for video game adaptations, generating unprecedented levels of critical acclaim and award nominations.
In January 2023, HBO's The Last of Us (TLOU) based on Naughty Dog's 2013 game, received 24 Emmy nominations (winning 8) and was the most watched show in the history of HBO Max in Europe and Latin America. Rolling Stone credited TLOU with ushering in a 'golden age' of video game adaptations. The Super Mario Bros Movie (SMBM) based on Nintendo's iconic characters became the highest grossing film based on a video game and scored the biggest opening weekend of any animated movie. The trend continued in 2024, with the Fallout series being well received by critics and fans alike and becoming the second most watched series in the history of Amazon Prime.
Evidence suggests that adaptation success is translating to an uptick of interest in the original games themselves. Following the success of TLOU, UK physical sales for the PS5 remake jumped by 238%. Nintendo experienced a 14% and 26% increase in hardware and software sales respectively, with a marked difference in hardware sales in territories where SMBM screened. Fallout games have experienced renewed engagement with enhanced download figures and in-game spend, as well as skyrocketing daily playercount. Further adaptations have been announced for 2024, including films based on the Borderlands franchise (starring Cate Blanchett and Kevin Hart) and Sonic the Hedgehog 3 following the success of Sonic the Hedgehog 2, which was the highest grossing video game movie of all time in the US until the release of the Mario Bros Movie. Multiple TV adaptations are also set for release, including two animated series for Netflix (season 2 of League of Legend's Arcane, and a Tomb Raider animated series) and Amazon Prime's live action Yakuza series due to launch in October.
It is important to note, however, that Fallout and TLOU have succeeded on television because the games they are based on translate well to the TV screen - they are story-rich and character driven, with rich worldbuilding. Both adaptations were also unafraid to diverge from the games where required. TLOU as a cinematic experience was highly adaptable into the TV format, though HBO made considered changes where necessary (such as a well-received episode about a queer couple in the apocalypse, which diverged from the game). Fallout while faithfully drawing from its distinct setting and retrofuturistic design elements, created a unique story, extending an established series without retreading the plot of any game. This worked well in an open world franchise where players can make their own stories.
Upcoming releases should take note - they may be most successful when they respect the underlying source material, but make appropriate changes where necessary to suit an alternative medium.
Debbie Heywood looks at progress on gambling reform and the new government's policy.
The Conservatives conducted a review of the Gambling Act during their various tenures, concluding under Prime Minister Sunak that reforms were needed. The Sunak government published a White Paper in April 2023 outlining proposed reforms. The DCMS Committee published its report on gambling regulation on 21 December 2023 in response to the White Paper, and the former government's response to the report was published on 19 April 2024. The DCMS Committee made a series of recommendations and the then government's response largely explained how it was already acting on the majority of them. This was not only through work on a Gambling Bill and related consultations, but also due to work by other organisations like the Gambling Commission and the ASA, CAP and BCAP, which are implementing or will implement some of the Committee's recommendations. The recommendations themselves mostly expanded on plans set out in the White Paper.
The Sunak government's response to the DCMS Committee report is a useful summary of various ongoing initiatives and their progress more or less up to the point of the general election.
Now we have a new Labour government so the question is whether and to what extent it will build on the White Paper. In its manifesto, Labour committed to reducing gambling-related harm. It promised to reform gambling regulation and to continue working with the industry to ensure responsible gaming. Beyond these general aims, the manifesto was silent as to whether or not the promised reforms would essentially be those proposed in the White Paper. The 17 July 2024 King's Speech did not mention gambling reform, however, given the extensive and lengthy consultation underpinning the White Paper, it seems unlikely that Labour will start completely afresh. Even if another consultation is pending, proposed reforms are likely to be significantly based on the work done to date. Timing is, however, more uncertain. On the one hand, much of the work on a new Gambling Bill has already been done, on the other, based on the King's Speech, the new government is prioritising other sectors in its focus on growth.
Oz Watson looks at what has changed in the updated in-game purchases guidance.
Back in 2021, CAP and BCAP published guidance on the advertising of in-game purchases. The guidance set out what advertisers must do in order to advertise in-game purchases, and the games that feature them, in a responsible manner and without misleading consumers.
The games industry has advanced rapidly in the intervening three years. CAP recently reviewed its guidance to ensure it remains accurate and appropriate to the current games market. The review looked to incorporate key issues in games advertising that have led to upheld consumer complaints. In particular, the revised guidance, published on 21 May 2024, expands on the following issues around misleading ads, saying advertisers should:
The guidance seeks to address the fact that there have been a number of upheld complaints in relation to ads that did not disclose the presence of in-game purchases, including loot boxes. It now reflects the fact that the presence of such content in ads may influence consumers' purchasing decisions and should, therefore, be made clear in the ads for the game.
The more detailed guidance goes on to cover the following key issues:
Scope of guidance - the new guidance addresses how the UK Advertising Codes apply to in-game purchases within apps and video games. It was formulated following consultation with various stakeholders, resulting in some significant changes particularly around remit, virtual currency price statements, and concerns relating to gambling and loot boxes.
Retention and changes - while most of the original guidance from 2021 remains intact, substantial amendments have been introduced including:
Concerns about gambling - although some responses to the consultation equated random-item purchases (loot boxes) with gambling, CAP and BCAP have not defined them as such, following the Gambling Commission's stance.
Children’s exposure - marketing communications targeting under-16s must avoid direct exhortations to buy or use 'buy now' messaging.
Implementation period - advertisers have a grace period after publication of the guidance during which they can adjust their content informally - six months for in-game content and three months for all other ads - to comply with the new guidance before formal enforcement begins.
The primary aim of the guidance is to ensure responsible marketing that does not mislead consumers about the nature or cost of in-game purchases. It will undergo review 12 months after publication to evaluate its effectiveness. Existing advertisements should be altered or retracted as soon as possible following publication of the guidelines if they are not compliant.
Jo Joyce looks at the impact of the recently enacted DMCC Act on competition for games and gaming platforms.
Covering similar ground to the EUs Digital Markets Act, the UK's Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act (DMCCA), finalised in May 2024, is designed to shift the regulatory landscape for digital marketplaces, including gaming platforms operating in the UK. The DMCCA creates robust measures to curtail anti-competitive practices and foster fair competition. A critical area of focus is the potential preferential treatment that gaming platforms may extend to their own games - a practice that could now face stringent legal scrutiny.
Anti-competitive games
Gaming platforms are juggernauts in the entertainment industry, providing a medium for play but increasingly acting as gatekeepers to vast digital ecosystems. Their influence extends from game distribution to online multiplayer environments and real-life convention events. However, concerns over anti-competitive behaviour arise when these platforms leverage their dominant positions to unfairly promote their proprietary titles over third-party games.
Methods adopted by platforms to favour in-house content include:
Such behaviour creates a disadvantage for independent games and acts as a barrier to market entry for smaller games.
Rules and penalties
The DMCCA aims to address the current market imbalance in favour of platform-owned games by defining clear rules for entities designated as having 'Strategic Market Status' (SMS). Platforms with SMS wield considerable market power; under the DMCCA they are subject to additional rules and scrutiny (including potential audits) by designated regulator the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) to ensure they do not engage in self-preferencing activities that would disadvantage competitors.
Under this new framework, an SMS-designated gaming platform may be required to provide equal access and visibility for all game publishers. This means algorithmic transparency in storefront recommendations and equitable terms for revenue sharing. The DMCCAs provisions seek to prevent practices such as exclusive incentives or preferential placement that could undermine consumer choice and stifle innovation among independent game developers.
Specific codes of conduct will guide operations within these digital spheres. These codes are expected to detail permissible forms of competitive behaviour as well as actions considered detrimental to a thriving marketplace - such as unfair application of platform rules or manipulation of user data for competitive gain.
The CMA has the power under the DMCCA to conduct dawn raids and compel individuals present in the UK to attend interviews. Significant fines are also within the CMA’s arsenal and if a platform fails to comply with investigative requirements those fines can be up to 1% of worldwide annual turnover or 5% of worldwide daily turnover (or up to GBP30,000 per day for an individual who fails to comply). Obstructing an investigation, providing false evidence or destroying evidence would be a criminal offence with potential custodial sentences in serious cases.
The level playing field
If rigorously enforced by the CMA, the impact of these changes on the economics of gaming could be profound. Independent game developers will likely see improved visibility and sales opportunities. Consumers will benefit from a broader selection of games and potentially higher quality as competition drives innovation.
Most aspects of the DMCCA are expected to come into force in late 2024 (the vast majority of the Act must be brought in by secondary legislation). Consultation on the CMA’s draft guidance for the new DMCCA regime closed on the 12 July 2024, so more information on the CMA’s intended enforcement approach will be available soon. In the meantime, platforms should waste no time in assessing their operations to identify high risk activities and avoid being caught out by the new regime.
Sharif Ibrahim looks at a recent reference to the Dutch Supreme Court which stands to resolve current uncertainties caused by conflicting lower court decisions.
In 2021, the regulated market for remote gambling in the Netherlands opened. This has triggered many new regulatory developments and changes over the course of the last three years and new developments keep coming, for example in the field of player protection and playing limits.
In parallel to these developments, there is an ongoing debate on the legal status of the agreements concluded between players and unlicensed operators of remote games of chance, mainly those concluded prior to the regulation of remote gambling in the Netherlands. The issue is whether that category of players can validly claim back their losses. One of the most well-known cases in this respect was between a player and Unibet. This was brought before the District Court (in 2015) and the Amsterdam Court of Appeal (in 2016). Both courts concluded that the remote game of chance agreements are not void and that the player cannot claim back their losses.
Recently, there has been an influx of similar cases and there are several conflicting judgments. Some courts considered remote game of chance agreements as void and ordered the unlicensed operators to pay back the players’ losses. Others have sided with the case law from 2015 and 2016 and decided that the agreements are not void so there is no reason to pay back losses to players.
On 12 June 2024, the courts of Amsterdam and North-Holland, observing that approximately 50 similar cases were pending, jointly decided to submit questions to the Dutch Supreme Court to get clarity on the status of the agreements between players and unlicensed operators. The referring courts expect the answers will lead to fewer conflicting outcomes in these kind of cases. Both courts have also issued a preliminary ruling that the agreements with the unlicensed operators are void, but they have emphasised that this is subject to the views of the Supreme Court whose ruling will be widely anticipated.
Ameer Gazder looks at why the Digital Gaming Tax Credit has not yet proved popular.
In May, the Irish Department of Finance was reported as confirming that while a number of applications have been made by Irish gaming companies to claim a Digital Gaming Tax Credit, no claims have actually been filed. The Department cited this as a common phenomenon with newly introduced tax credits and has noted that, in some cases, claims may be filed at the end of a multi-year development process. However, there may be bigger issues at play which form barriers to widespread adoption.
The Digital Gaming Tax Credit was announced by the Irish Department of Finance in late 2022, as part of efforts to further incentivise investment in Ireland's digital gaming sector by promoting the development of culturally Irish and European games.
The credit, if granted, is honoured against the company's Irish corporation tax which is due and may be claimed against costs incurred in the development phase of a given game. A broad range of developmental activities is covered by the credit, including conceptualisation, prototyping, programming, visual design, audio production, and quality assurance testing. Businesses involved in these activities can claim relief on costs associated with employee salaries, subcontracted services, software licences, and other development-related expenses. If an application is successful, the business may then claim the credit which will be 32% of the lowest of: (i) eligible expenditure; (ii) 80% of total qualifying expenditure; or (iii) EUR25 million.
Ireland's video game market is booming with a surge in indie game development and a growing esports scene, so why is that not a single company has so far claimed the Digital Gaming Tax Credit?
A number of factors are likely to affect take up:
The credit is not available for all games and games with a gambling element - a significant part of the sector - are excluded.
In addition, to successfully claim the credit, businesses must satisfy a cultural test administered by the Department of Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media, with consideration being provided to the following criteria:
Finally, the game must also make it to market for the development company to be eligible to receive the credit.
The Irish games representative body, Imirt, is reported as having submitted a pre-budget submission in July, calling for changes to the regime, Whether the Digital Gaming Credit initiative will ultimately be as effective as Ireland’s highly successful Tax Credit for Film, Television and Animation, with or without reform, remains to be seen.
Debbie Heywood looks at new UK gambling rules which start to bite in August 2024.
The Gambling Commission announced new rules to help improve safety and consumer choice on 1 May 2024. The changes are in line with the previous government's White Paper and follow a consultation.
Changes will be implemented in four stages: August 2024, November 2024, January 2025 and February 2025. The Commission will:
The rules around speed and intensity of online products will need to be taken into account in online gaming products being developed in the run up to 17 January 2025. Existing products will need to check they comply and ensure they adjust accordingly if necessary.
In-scope businesses need to ensure they are ready to comply, particularly in relation to the first batch of changes applying from August 2024.
Shireen Shaikh looks at the implications of industry layoffs.
A recent report by Game Developers Conference (GDC) 2024 surveyed 3,000 developers and found that 35% had been affected by layoffs in the previous 12 months and 56% were worried about future layoffs. In February 2024, Electronic Arts announced the cancellation of its upcoming Star Wars Games, with an estimated 670 employees to be made redundant globally. Meanwhile, Microsoft recently announced plans to make 1,900 redundancies in the gaming division and Sony decided to close its London studio, with 900 staff likely to lose their jobs globally.
News of mass layoffs always sends shockwaves through a sector. This is particularly marked where, as in the gaming industry, this was preceded by a massive growth spurt such as occurred during the pandemic. The news is particularly hard to swallow in an industry characterised by creativity, optimism and community.
Some of the factors causing the job cuts are over-expansion during lockdown (or the transient nature of the increased demand), general economic uncertainty and paucity of funding to start new games studios. Consolidation and a desire to increase profitability, ever-present in any business model, also explain current trends.
Swathes of cuts leave a scar and change the morale and expectations of the workforce for some time. This can give rise to a greater awareness of employment rights and a demand for trade union representation in future. It is no accident that the membership of the gaming division of the Independent Workers of Great Britain Union grew exponentially in 2023, when the job cuts started to proliferate. The branch describes itself as a worker-led democratic union advocating for workers' rights, including an end to unpaid overtime, transparency of pay and better records on diversity and inclusion. It has been resisting calls for return to the office where employers have insisted on this.
It is always challenging for an employer to manage a collective redundancy exercise well, particularly across jurisdictions. Employee or trade union representatives must be informed and consulted with (also elected if there are none to begin with) on a range of prescribed matters set out in the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. The messaging to staff must strike the right tone and there may be individual consultation points raised alongside those raised by employee representatives. What makes it even more challenging is when workers are also starting to organise in new ways.
With the second big concern highlighted by developers in the GDC report being the use of AI, it is fair to predict that workers in the game industry are likely to want to organise more collectively in future. This is not just the case in the UK – 150 workers at Sega of America recently became the first US game workers to ratify a union contract in the USA. The innovative nature of such individuals may mean that we see novel forms of collective action emerging, or even creative partnerships we have not yet thought about.
Debbie Heywood looks at Microsoft's plans to make four Xbox titles available on rival platforms.
In February 2024, Microsoft announced it would make four previously exclusive Xbox games available for use on rival platforms. Microsoft insists it continues to invest in developing new consoles, but Microsoft's Phil Spencer also said: "I have a fundamental belief that in the next five to ten years, exclusive games which are exclusive to one piece of hardware are going to be a smaller and smaller part of the games industry".
Microsoft sold 'only' 7.6 million Xbox consoles of the 46.5 million consoles sold in 2023, so its announcement is widely seen as part of a shift to focus more on cloud and mobile gaming (with stated ambitions to build a gaming app store on mobile).
Debbie Heywood looks at Epic Games's response to Apple's DMA compliance strategy.
Apple has announced, as part of its compliance with the EU's Digital Markets Act (DMA), that it will allow EU customers to download apps outside its App Store, will allow the use of alternative payment systems to ApplePay, and will allow iPhone users to select from a number of different browsers as their default.
Apple was fined EUR1.8 billion by the European Commission in February 2024, for abusive app store rules which were found to prevent music streaming app developers including Spotify, from telling iPhone users about cheaper payment alternatives outside the App Store. Apple is reportedly planning to appeal the decision, however, many of the activities in question are now unlawful under the DMA for in-scope services.
Apple's DMA compliance strategy has, however, led larger app developers to express concern about Apple's new charging model which accompanies the changes. It will charge a "core technology fee" for each app installation and update where the developer makes the app available other than through Apple's App Store. The first 1 million first annual installs will be free, and reinstallations and updates within the first twelve months of installation will be exempt. Apple claims this means the installation fee will only apply to less than 1% of developers. Epic Games, likely to be caught by the new charge, is among those to strongly criticise the plans, accusing Apple of "malicious compliance" with the DMA and of introducing measures which would affectively allow it to block competitor game stores and new entrants on the App Store.
Apple removed Epic's Fortnite game from the App Store in 2020 after Epic breached the App Store's in-app payment rules. However, in early March, Apple agreed to re-instate Epic's developer account two days after blocking Epic from launching an online marketplace on Apple operating systems.
Apple claimed it had taken the step to block Epic as a result of concerns that it would not comply with its new rules, introduced as part of Apple's DMA compliance plans. It said it had reversed its decision following assurances from Epic, which is now free to bring the Epic game store and Fortnite back to iOS in the EU.
Oz Watson, Jo Joyce and ECIJA's Xavi Muňoz-Bellvehí look at the evolving approach to regulation of loot boxes in the EU.
The use of in-game purchases is a popular monetisation model. It involves the sale of gameplay extras like cosmetic items and emotes using in-game currency which can be bought for real money to add an additional revenue stream.
In-game purchases have come under scrutiny due to the risk of player confusion about whether they provide a competitive advantage during gameplay and, in some cases, due to a potential overlap with gambling regulation.
The UK Gambling Commission (the Commission) has identified loot boxes as a potential risk to children - some jurisdictions such as the Netherlands and Belgium have already regulated their use and China has recently announced new rules which include banning loot boxes for children (see here for more).
Germany now looks as though it may take a stricter approach in this area, aligning itself with the Netherlands and Belgium. The Bremen state governing coalition (made up of the Social Democrats, the Greens and Die Linke) is pushing for a ban on in-game loot boxes and the state parliament has asked the state senate to push for reform at a federal, nationwide, level. So, while the proposals have no practical effect yet, there is strong sentiment among some political parties in Germany to regulate loot boxes. The current regulatory positions adopted by the UK and Germany are broadly similar, in Germany titles containing loot boxes must declare this on the box and the inclusion of loot boxes will be factored into the age rating given to the game. Whilst in the UK, PEGI determines the age rating of a game based on content descriptors (which include loot boxes under the categorisation of 'Paid Random Items') but does not explicitly factor in the presence of loot boxes to the age rating that is assigned. Rather, this content descriptor may accompany the age rating and an additional notice if the in-game purchases include such items as loot boxes.
Ireland's draft Gambling Regulation Bill (discussed in more detail here) also, on the face of it at least, looks likely to bring loot boxes within scope of tighter regulation in Ireland. In the current GRB draft, “game” means a game— (a) of skill or chance, or partly of skill and partly of chance, and (b) where a participant in the game may, having made a payment, win a prize of money or money’s worth; “gaming” means providing a game or participating in a game and falls within the definition of betting. By this definition it seems likely that some loot boxes will be caught.
Spain also recognises the operational mechanics of loot boxes as conceptually similar to certain gambling activities, such as slot machines, making them potentially fall under the gambling laws. Consequently, the Spanish Ministry of Consumer Affairs has initiated a draft regulation targeting a specific type of loot box, referred to as "random reward mechanisms." These require a monetary transaction from the player to activate the random reward mechanism, offering economically valuable rewards that can be exchanged among game participants or converted into real money or other virtual items, for example aesthetic improvements or competitive advantages. Currently, when game reward mechanisms fulfil these specific criteria, they are designated as gambling activities. The Spanish Gambling Authority has clarified that, without explicit regulation, these practices are effectively banned. Also, under this regulatory proposal, access to loot boxes would be restricted for minors through age verification mechanisms.
It will be interesting to see how these initiatives develop and whether we are going to start to see a wave of increased regulation of loot boxes across Europe. And even if the UK is not currently proposing regulation, its Advertising Standards Authority has recently upheld a number of complaints around adverts which failed to alert gamers to the fact their games contained loot boxes, causing some to call the UK's self-regulatory approach into question.
Debbie Heywood looks at Gambling Commission consultations.
The government announced a Gambling Review on 8 December 2020 eventually publishing a White Paper on 27 April 2023 alongside Gambling Commission advice. The first set of consultations to implement proposals was launched in August 2023 with a second launched in November 2023 and closing in February 2024.
In December 2023, the Gambling Commission announced a consultation on financial penalties and financial key event reporting as part of its work to ensure effective regulation. The Commission is looking to bring greater clarity and transparency to the way financial penalties are calculated, and is proposing amendments to rules on financial key event reporting to take account of the increased complexity of mergers and acquisitions and globalisation in the sector. This consultation closed on 15 March 2024.
The Gambling Commission is now analysing responses and plans to publish one or more responses in 2024.
In the meantime, on 23 February, the government published its response to its 2023 consultation on maximum stake limits for online slot games. It confirms the plans to introduce a statutory maximum stake limit of GBP5 per spin for adults aged 25 and over, and GBP2 for young adults aged 18-24.
Work on reforming and updating the UK's gambling regime is clearly continuing and gathering pace since publication of the much-delayed White Paper. This suggests that by the end of this year, there should be greater clarity around the changes to be made to the UK's gambling regime.
Laura Craig looks at the impact of China's latest proposals for the gaming industry.
December saw China's National Press and Publication Administration issue new draft regulations targeted at the gaming sector - the Measures for the Administration of Online Games. The proposed rules seek to introduce spending limits for online games, ban rewards for daily player logins, and prohibit minors from being offered 'lucky draw' loot box prizes. The announced regulations therefore impacted several core monetisation and gameplay mechanisms featured in live service games, which make up a large portion of China's gaming sector.
If passed, these restrictions would not be the first to impact the interactive entertainment industry in China. In 2021, limits were imposed on playtime for minors and approvals for new video game releases were paused due to concerns around addiction, which resulted in revenues for the gaming sector shrinking in 2021 and 2022. 2023 saw renewed growth as games began to be approved for release again, but the proposed restrictions highlight that concerns remain. Following the proposals, Tencent lost USD43 billion in market value and Netease shares fell by a quarter. With further significant losses reported by other major tech and gaming companies, Chinese authorities subsequently reported that the draft rules may be revised and a government official involved with the regulation of press and publications has reportedly been removed from office.
Jo Joyce looks at Ireland's Gambling Regulation Bill.
Coverage of proposed changes in gambling regulation in Ireland have been focused on the impact on horse racing and casinos but once established, the new regulator, the Gambling Regulatory Authority of Ireland (GRAI), will have powers to regulate digital advertising, websites, and apps. The proposed changes set out in the Gambling Regulation Bill (GRB) are set to significantly change and modernise the digital and remote gambling market in Ireland and the broad scope may bring a range of digital activities and promotions within the scope of gambling laws for the first time.
As the GRB slowly makes its way through the legislative process, gaming companies need to start considering now whether their activities could bring them within scope of the proposed law and what that might mean if they are caught.
The blurred line between gaming and gambling
A big focus of the GRB is child protection. The Institute of Public Health, called for in-game transactions to be subject to regulatory scrutiny owing to potential links between loot boxes and experiences of problem gambling, particularly among children. When debating regulatory change there was discussion in the Oireachtas (Irish Parliament) on how and whether to bring features such as loot boxes within the scope of regulation (loot boxes are bundles of virtual items related to a video game that can be won by a gamer as a reward or can be purchased with real money).
The gaming industry worldwide has generally resisted the treatment of loot boxes as gambling but the definitions of the GRB would, on the face of them at least, bring loot boxes within scope of tighter regulation in Ireland. In the current GRB draft, “game” means a game— (a) of skill or chance, or partly of skill and partly of chance, and (b) where a participant in the game may, having made a payment, win a prize of money or money’s worth; “gaming” means providing a game or participating in a game and falls within the definition of betting. By this definition it seems likely that loot boxes will be caught.
Gambling with credit cards will also be prohibited under the GRB. If loot boxes and other in-game transactions fall within the scope of gambling restrictions, then gaming companies will need to ensure that they are not accepting payment for them by credit card – though this may be the least of their challenges.
Advertising and promotion
A significant effect of the GRB will be a restriction of advertising and promotion of gambling activities. Under the current GRB draft, “advertise” means any form of communication, whether to the public or otherwise, intended to publicise or otherwise market a gambling activity including by electronic means including by telephone and on the internet.
Restrictions will be particularly tight on social media where advertising of gambling services will be prohibited. All online gambling promotion will become opt-in only, though the acceptable mechanisms for managing opt-in are not yet clear.
Significant limits will also be imposed on advertising and sponsorship – clubs with members under 18 will not be able to take gambling sponsorship, and gambling advertising will be prohibited between the hours of 5:30 and 21:00 on television, radio and on-demand streaming services accessed in Ireland.
Penalties
The GRB details significant penalties (up to EUR20 million or 10% of turnover) for companies that breach the law. The Bill defines turnover as total income from gambling less the total amount paid out in winnings. While the Bill does not expressly state that turnover means worldwide turnover, it does not restrict it to turnover derived from Irish consumers. In the case of the most serious breaches, including failure to protect children from gambling, custodial sentences of up to eight years may be handed down which, in theory, could be given to company directors with sufficient personal responsibility for the conduct of illegal activities.
The GRAI will have the power to proactively tackle problem sites and operations run from outside Ireland by making an application to the High Court to require internet service providers to geoblock offending websites, preventing access in Ireland.
New remote licences will include a requirement on the licensee to maintain a register of account holders and to take steps to ensure responsible gambling including the provision of age gating and parental restrictions.
Giving with one hand and taking with the other?
While much of the GRB may seem to be bad news for the gambling and game industries, there is a corresponding hope that by modernising gambling law in Ireland and providing certainty and clarity for the digital age, the industry can view Ireland as a well-regulated and safe place to do business. Such ambitions for a successful digital gambling industry in Ireland are mirrored by the hopes for the gaming sector, with significant incentives offered by the Digital Gaming Tax Credit introduced in 2022. Unless the scope of gaming activities and the inclusion or exclusion of in-game transactions in the GRB is clarified in the draft Bill however, these ambitions may be hard to meet and game developers may be forced to adopt a cautious approach in Ireland to balance opportunity with operational certainty.
2024年6月26日
作者 Oz Watson 以及 Debbie Heywood