The DPDP Act is live. Fines reach ₹250 Cr, and every day matters.Run a free check
ONLINE GAMING

Age is not a checkbox anymore.

Gaming sits at the intersection of the two hardest parts of the DPDP Act: a young user base and a business model built on behavioural data. Section 9 makes tracking and targeted advertising to children unlawful, which is a product constraint before it is a compliance one.

Built for: Real-money gaming platforms, fantasy sports, casual gaming studios and gaming intermediaries.

WHAT MAKES THIS SECTOR DIFFERENT

The pressure points, specifically

01

Section 9 bites hardest here

Behavioural tracking and targeted advertising directed at children are prohibited, not merely consent-gated. If your acquisition funnel depends on either, the obligation reaches the product, not just the privacy policy.

02

Age assurance has to be real

A self-declared date of birth is not verification. Establishing that a user is an adult, and obtaining verifiable parental consent where they are not, is now a first-order engineering problem.

03

KYC and self-exclusion generate their own records

Identity documents held for KYC, and exclusion lists held to keep a user out, are retained for reasons other than consent. Both need a lawful basis stated and a retention position that survives a deletion request.

04

Two rulebooks at once

The MeitY online-gaming amendments and the DPDP Act arrived close together and overlap on minors, verification and grievance handling. Compliance work that treats them separately does the same job twice and still leaves gaps.

WHAT SAMMATI DOES

The parts that matter here

  • A real-money gaming purpose pack

    Purposes drawn from the MeitY 2023 amendment covering age verification, KYC, self-exclusion and minor protection, with DPDP-aligned lawful bases already assigned. A starting position rather than a blank document.

  • Verifiable parental consent as a real flow

    Where a user is identified as a child, a guardian consent path with the relationship recorded, and the §9 restrictions applied to that account rather than left to a policy nobody enforces at runtime.

  • Purpose-level control over behavioural data

    Analytics, personalisation and advertising held as separate purposes so you can switch behavioural processing off for an account without switching the account off. That granularity is what makes §9 implementable.

  • Grievance handling that satisfies both regimes

    A grievance officer route with statutory clocks and an audit trail, which the DPDP Act requires and the gaming rules expect, running as one workflow instead of two inboxes.

  • Consent from the app, at play volume

    A mobile SDK and a server-side API fast enough to sit in a signup path, because a consent check in front of a first game is a conversion surface as much as a compliance one.

This sector has a ready-made purpose pack. See what is in it.

QUESTIONS WE GET ASKED

Online gaming and the DPDP Act

General information about the DPDP Act, 2023, not legal advice. For a position specific to your organisation, talk to us.

Where to start

Find out where you actually stand.

The free self-assessment takes a few minutes and gives you a written position on your own setup, not a generic checklist.