Forty-four illegal gambling platforms blocked by Philippines’ telecom firms

Dig Deeper

Related stories

2025/07/08: Four Korean nationals arrested for illegal online gambling operations 2025/07/21: Philippine government considers mandatory stock exchange listing for igaming firms 2025/08/22: India law bans nearly all igaming platforms 2025/09/08: Regulated igaming significant revenue driver in Philippines, PAGCOR says

The Backstory

Why California is moving now

California’s looming decision on paid fantasy sports did not happen in a vacuum. The state attorney general is expected to declare that online fantasy contests violate California gaming law, a position first reported by KCRA and echoed by industry and tribal sources tracking the inquiry. The legal opinion, which the California Department of Justice is expected to release on July 3, would target contests where players pay entry fees based on athlete performance, potentially upending a market that has operated for years without explicit authorization. As detailed in recent reporting, operators including DraftKings, PrizePicks and Underdog Fantasy warn the decision could block access for millions of users and disrupt significant revenue streams. KCRA’s coverage underscored the stakes, with tribal leaders arguing that these games function as unlicensed gambling that lacks consumer safeguards; that initial disclosure can be read at KCRA’s report on the pending ruling.

The timing aligns with mounting calls from lawmakers and tribal governments to bring clarity to offerings that evolved alongside, but outside, California’s tightly controlled gaming framework. It also follows a broader shift in global enforcement against unlicensed or unregulated online gambling, where regulators have leveraged internet service providers, payment companies and app stores to cut off access.

Years of gray-area growth in fantasy contests

Fantasy sports apps gained a foothold in California by positioning contests as games of skill. In practice, the products blurred lines with digital sports betting, especially with “daily fantasy” formats tied to individual player stat projections. As participation surged, so did concerns from compliance experts who argued that paying entry fees for cash prizes tied to sports outcomes met the test for gambling under state law. The lack of explicit authorization left a legal gap that operators filled while the Legislature failed to pass comprehensive online sports wagering rules.

That gap became more visible as the market matured. Companies scaled marketing across social media and streaming platforms, leaning on a decade of cultural normalization of fantasy and microbetting. But without state licensing, there were few guardrails on age verification, problem gambling controls or dispute resolution. That left consumer protection to company policy and industry self-policing, a model now under scrutiny if the attorney general formalizes the opinion previewed in California-focused reporting and flagged by KCRA.

Tribal pressure and consumer protection collide

California’s tribal governments, which operate regulated casinos under compacts, have pressed for clarity. They argue that unlicensed fantasy operators siphon activity away from legal venues and put players at risk. James Siva, chair of the California Nations Indian Gaming Association, framed the issue as a consumer-protection gap, warning of fraud and underage gambling if platforms operate outside state oversight, as noted in coverage of the pending AG opinion. The tribes’ longstanding role in the state’s gambling ecosystem gives their objections political weight, especially after high-profile ballot fights over sports betting.

For the attorney general, the case marries two priorities: enforcing existing prohibitions on unlicensed games of chance and aligning California with a broader trend of clamping down on gray-market digital gambling. The move would likely push operators to either exit the state, seek legislative authorization with strict licensing or overhaul products to meet a narrower definition of skill-based play.

A global crackdown sets the tone

California’s posture mirrors a wider global push to curb illegal online gambling through technical blocks and coordinated enforcement. In Australia, the communications regulator has ordered internet providers to block offshore casinos that violate national law, most recently targeting Megabet Prize, TF2Royal, Casino Intense and Mega Medusa. Since 2019, more than 1,200 sites have been blocked and another 220 have exited the market, according to regulatory updates. Regulators there warn that illegal sites lack basic consumer protections, leaving users with little recourse when funds disappear.

In the Philippines, telecom firms moved to block 44 of 52 illegal platforms flagged by the national gambling regulator PAGCOR, following a congressional inquiry into revenue leakage and consumer harm. Authorities are also pressing app stores and e-wallet providers to cut ties with noncompliant operators, and warned users they could face liability for bypassing blocks, according to recent enforcement actions. That crackdown coincides with cross-border arrests of alleged organizers of large-scale illegal betting rings. A joint operation by Philippine and Korean authorities led to the arrest of four Korean nationals tied to dozens of sites and billions in illicit revenue, as detailed in investigative reports.

The through line: governments are using network-level blocks, financial surveillance and criminal prosecutions to limit unlicensed gambling’s reach. California, without the same national-level blocking tools, is leaning on legal interpretation and potential civil or criminal enforcement to reshape the market.

Youth exposure and the addiction risk

The consumer risk argument driving California’s shift is shared elsewhere. In India, a report by Consumer Unity & Trust Society estimated illegal gambling sites handled nearly $100 billion in annual deposits and drew more than 5.4 billion visits in a year, with platforms allegedly exploiting gaps in advertising rules and payment systems. The report warned of a steep rise in youth exposure, aided by private channels and lax age checks, and urged a national regulatory framework with tech-company cooperation and public education, according to the group’s findings. India’s Supreme Court has also been petitioned to consider a wider ban on online sports betting apps due to youth harm.

Industry responses vary. In the Philippines, operator DigiPlus rolled out account controls across its platforms, including daily limits, play schedules, deposit caps and self-exclusion, plus financial coaching and a PAGCOR-backed education campaign. The company framed the effort as core to its brand, not just compliance, in its announcement. In many markets, though, such measures are optional or limited to licensed operators, leaving gaps when unlicensed services proliferate.

What’s at stake for platforms and players

If California declares paid fantasy contests illegal, operators face a choice: exit, litigate, or retool. The near-term impact would be loss of access to one of the largest U.S. markets and a potential shift in national momentum as other states revisit their own definitions. Players could see accounts frozen or withdrawn options curtailed while companies sort compliance, and affiliate marketers may scramble to adjust. The longer-term outcome likely depends on whether state lawmakers put forward a licensing framework that distinguishes fantasy contests from sports wagering while imposing age checks, deposit caps and dispute mechanisms that mirror regulated gambling.

The broader context is clear. From Canberra to Manila to Sacramento, the policy trend favors tighter controls, clearer rules and stronger consumer protections. California’s move, previewed in advance reporting and first surfaced by KCRA, would align the state with regulators who are prioritizing certainty over experimentation. For an industry built on innovation and speed, the next phase may hinge on whether growth can coexist with the guardrails officials now expect.