含羞草社区

Esports and gaming have become powerful engines of innovation across Asia, yet each market faces its own peculiar legal and regulatory challenges

Esports and gaming regulations in Japan

As a general rule, gambling is prohibited under Japanese law, although a limited range of gambling activities – for example, government-authorised horse racing and certain land-based casino operations – are permitted as statutory exceptions.

With respect to casinos, the nation’s first integrated resort (IR), which will include a licensed land-based casino, is scheduled to open in Osaka in 2030. The Japanese government is expected to commence a second round of IR project applications in the near future.

It is important to emphasise that these exceptions apply solely to land-based casinos. Online casino operations remain strictly prohibited in Japan and fall outside the scope of the IR framework.

Esports regulations

From about 2010, Japan experienced a surge in smartphone games – particularly those featuring “loot boxes” – which resulted in heightened public concerns over consumer protection and, in turn, regulatory scrutiny of video games.

At that time, some legal experts opined that large-scale esports tournaments offering substantial prizemoney could not be held in Japan due to these consumer protection considerations.

However, in February 2018, Japan Esports Union (JESU) was established as a unified national organisation. Since then, JESU has engaged in active lobbying and policy development for esports regulations. As a result, Japan, long a global leader in video game culture, has made notable progress in the esports industry, including hosting international esports events and securing esports for the 2026 Asian Games.

As of 2025, the primary legal issues facing the development of esports in Japan remain gambling regulations and the rules governing game-related events.

Esports and gambling law

Japanese criminal law defines “gambling” very broadly. An activity may constitute gambling if it involves any element of chance, even when the outcome is influenced by the participant’s skill. Consequently, esports competitions may fall within the statutory definition of gambling, particularly in cases where an organiser collects entry fees from participants and funds the prizemoney from those fees. The tournament may be deemed gambling.

To avoid this classification, the prize pool money should not be derived, directly or indirectly, from entry fees. A common structure is to allocate all entry fees exclusively to operating expenses and have an independent sponsor provide all of the prizemoney.

However, even when a sponsor funds the prizes, the risk of a gambling classification remains if the prize arrangement is effectively equivalent to using participants’ fees, for instance, where the parent company of the event organiser serves as the sponsor. Therefore, each tournament format should be reviewed by experienced counsel to assess the risks. JESU has published guidelines that address the organisation of tournaments that charge entry fees to avoid gambling concerns (for details, see the section on game amusement business regulation).

Prizemoney restrictions eased

International esports titles often award substantial prizemoney pools and attract significant public attention. However, at one time, it was widely understood that when a game publisher hosted an esports tournament in Japan, the Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (Premiums Act) capped the prizemoney at JPY100,000 (USD672).

The purpose of the Premiums Act is to prevent businesses from offering excessive prizes that might induce consumers to purchase low-quality products or distort competition. Because a publisher’s tournament effectively advertises the publisher’s own game – in part because players must own the game to practise and compete – publisher-funded prizemoney was viewed as a form of promotional “premium”, subject to the statutory cap.

Today, regulators and JESU recognise that prizemoney paid to professional players constitutes compensation for services rendered (i.e. for work performed) and thus falls outside the Premiums Act. As a result, high-value prizemoney pools generally are permitted.

Nevertheless, JESU encourages organisers to preserve the professional-services characterisation of prizemoney by: (1) issuing professional licences; (2) limiting participation to invited players; and (3) executing individual agreements with competitors.

If a third party other than the game’s publisher hosts a tournament, the Premiums Act typically does not apply. However, caution remains warranted, for example, if the organiser makes entry conditional on purchasing its own goods or services, or if the publisher provides financial support for the event.

Game business regulation

Large open tournaments, such as those modelled on the international fighting-game event “EVO”, have become popular in Japan. However, under the Act on Control and Improvement of Amusement Businesses (Amusement Business Act), businesses that charge players to use game machines have traditionally been required to arrange prior police authorisation. This burdensome process limited large-scale, fee-based tournaments, and forced many events to be held on a “free to enter” basis.

In 2020, after negotiations between JESU and law enforcement authorities, guidelines were issued clarifying that a tournament would not be a regulated “amusement business” if entry fees do not exceed actual operating costs (e.g. venue and equipment expenses). On this basis, major tournaments such as EVO Japan now routinely charge entry fees, while remaining compliant under the Amusement Business Act.

Copyright considerations

When a third party hosts an esports tournament using a game it does not own, the event involves multiple copyrighted works, including: (1) the game software; (2) any music or audio-visual assets used during play or broadcast; and (3) performers’ rights of the voice actors and others appearing in the game.

Streaming or otherwise publicly transmitting tournament gameplay without authorisation infringes these rights under Japanese copyright law. Therefore, organisers must secure appropriate licences from the game publisher and other relevant rights holders. Some publishers provide public tournament guidelines or end-user terms covering esports events. Organisers should comply with these requirements.

Overseas player visa rules

Foreign residents who wish to participate in a prizemoney esports tournament in Japan must obtain an appropriate visa for performance or competition. Currently, Japan does not have a visa category specifically dedicated to esports athletes. In most cases, participants apply for a short-term “entertainer” or athlete visa.

However, depending on the nature of the event and the purpose of travel, other visa classifications may be required. Therefore, organisers must confirm the appropriate visa type for each tournament and prepare invitation letters as necessary for visa applications in advance.

Visa applications take time to prepare, including time for the collection and submission of supporting documentation. Therefore, organisers should begin the process as early as possible. In several tournaments held in Japan, overseas players were unable to compete because their visa applications could not be completed before the tournament. Given these timing and procedural issues, it is important to engage qualified Japanese immigration professionals at an early stage to facilitate timely visa acquisition.

Data privacy of participants

Although Japan’s data protection regime is not as stringent as those in other countries and regions such as the US and EU, the comprehensive obligations in the Act on the Protection of Personal Information can apply to esports events.

Information that can identify a player, such as real names, constitutes personal information. If a well-known handle or in-game avatar can be linked to a specific individual, that identifier may also qualify as personal information under Japanese law. Organisers must determine what data they will collect with care, and ensure compliance with data privacy regulations.

Personal data may only be used within the scope of purposes as disclosed or notified to the data subject. Therefore, organisers should define and disclose the purposes of data use in relation to the nature and operation of the event. In practice, these requirements are typically addressed through a publicly available privacy policy.

Additional obligations include implementing appropriate security safeguards for personal data, complying with restrictions on the provision of personal data to third parties, and maintaining proper internal controls. Given the breadth of these requirements, esports organisers should consult with Japanese privacy and data protection experts early in the planning process.

Conclusion

As the esports industry continues to grow internationally, Japan’s legal and regulatory frameworks are evolving in response. Nevertheless, esports intersects with numerous legal regimes, and consistent enforcement practices have yet to emerge. The authors strongly advise any person or entity planning to engage in the esports business in Japan to consult with qualified Japanese legal counsel at an early stage to ensure full compliance with all applicable laws and regulations.

NISHIMURA & ASAHI
(GAIKOKUHO KYODO JIGYO)
Otemon Tower, 1-1-2 Otemachi
Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100-8124, Japan
Tel: 81 3 6250 6200

Back to top

---

Levelling up the law: Legal developments in Philippine esports

Electronic sports, or esports, have evolved from a niche pastime into a globally recognised profession and a commercial industry. In the Philippines, this transformation is particularly evident as millions of players, fans and investors contribute to its rapidly expanding digital ecosystem.

Today, the Philippine esports market is home to more than 16.5 million active gamers, with an estimated market revenue of USD27.7 million. This growth is driven largely by the accessibility of affordable smartphones and mobile internet, which have made electronic gaming more convenient and inclusive.

However, while the government has shown openness to its development, the legal and regulatory landscape remains limited and fragmented. This article outlines the current regulatory framework governing esports in the Philippines, the challenges it faces, and the proposed legislative measures that seek to strengthen governance in this growing sector.

Current regulatory framework

The Games and Amusements Board (GAB) is the principal regulatory body for professional sports in the Philippines. In 2017, the GAB officially recognised esports as a professional activity subject to its supervision and regulation. This was implemented through GAB Resolution No. 2017-21, entitled Guidelines Governing the Conduct of Electronic Sports in the Philippines, later amended by Resolution No. 2018-15, or the Amended Rules and Regulations Governing Professional Electronic Sports in the Philippines (esports rules).

Under the esports rules, any person or entity engaged in the conduct or operation of professional esports must obtain a licence from the GAB prior to participating in such activities. The licensing requirement extends to various roles including promoters or organisers, team managers, coaches, analysts, casters, security marshals, liaison officers and medical officers.

Before a professional esports event may proceed, the promoter must secure a permit from the GAB at least 10 days before the competition. Promoters are further responsible for maintaining peace and order during events, ensuring compliance with applicable laws and regulations, preventing acts of game-fixing or cheating, and reporting any violations that may compromise the integrity of the tournament.

While the GAB framework provides an initial structure for licensing and supervision, it remains the only formal regulation governing esports. It primarily addresses administrative and operational compliance, but does not cover broader issues in the esports industry.

Issues and challenges

Despite the growing acceptance of esports as a legitimate professional activity, several regulatory and institutional issues continue to hinder the full development of the industry.

Regulatory ambiguity and jurisdictional overlap. No single statute or agency provides a comprehensive legal framework for esports. While the GAB exercises authority over professional esports under its resolutions, other government entities such as the Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation (PAGCOR) and the Philippine Sports Commission (PSC) maintain related but distinct mandates.

This overlapping of jurisdictions often leads to confusion among stakeholders regarding which agency’s rules apply. For example, under the mandate of the PAGCOR, electronic gaming refers to games of chance offered through electronic gaming platforms, including sports betting, electronic bingo, online poker and other casino-style games.

However, the increasing commercialisation of esports through sponsorships, advertising and online streaming raises questions about whether certain forms of monetisation of online gaming fall within the PAGCOR’s jurisdiction.

Fragmented standards and compliance requirements. Because existing regulations are confined to the GAB’s administrative resolutions, there is currently no uniform standard for event organisation, player registration or contractual arrangements. Tournament organisers, sponsors and teams often rely on private contracts without the benefit of codified best practices, or dispute resolution mechanisms. This fragmentation has resulted in inconsistent compliance requirements and levels of oversight across events.

Without harmonised rules, smaller organisers or provincial tournaments may operate outside the GAB’s supervision, potentially exposing participants to unfair practices, unfulfilled prize commitments, or a lack of health and safety safeguards.

Lack of formal definition. This makes it difficult to distinguish esports from online gambling. While both take place in digital environments and may involve financial transactions, the two are legally and conceptually distinct. Esports are fundamentally competitions of skill, strategy and performance, whereas gambling involves wagering on outcomes predominantly determined by chance.

However, the rise of esports betting platforms, where spectators can place wagers on tournament outcomes, has complicated public understanding and regulatory classification. Without clear statutory parameters, esports risk being conflated with gambling, potentially subjecting legitimate competitions and participants to the same licensing and taxation regimes applicable to gaming operators.

Infrastructure limitations. While the Philippines is considered a mobile-first esports market, uneven access to reliable and high-speed internet connectivity continues to constrain the industry’s development. Many regions outside Metro Manila lack the infrastructure necessary to host large-scale competitions or support high-performance gaming.

Developments in legislation

Recognising the above-mentioned challenges and issues, legislators in both chambers of congress have filed several measures aimed at institutionalising a regulatory and policy framework for the industry.

House Bill No. 05401 and House Bill No. 03751 – the Esports Act. House Bill No. 05401 of the 19th Congress, and House Bill No. 03751 of the 20th Congress, both titled the Esports Act, provide a definition for “esports” and propose the creation of the Philippine Esports Commission (PEC) as the government agency responsible for regulating, organising and promoting esports in the country, operating independently of the PSC. The proposed PEC would have powers and functions, including the following:

1. Formulate and implement uniform policies and rules for esports activities in the Philippines;
2. Establish a masterplan for the medium and long-term development of the esports industry;
3. Promote international tournaments and events relating to esports;
4. Promote research and technological innovation for esports infrastructure;
5. Secure financial resources for esports development; and
6. Establish an esports industry support centre.

House Bill No. 05401, which was filed on 4 October 2022, has been pending with the Committee on Government Reorganisation since then. House Bill No. 03751 was recently filed, on 14 August 2025.

House Bill No. 07411, the Magna Carta for Esports Gamers. Complementing the institutional framework proposed under the Esports Act, House Bill No. 07411 of the 19th Congress, or the Magna Carta for Esports Gamers, focuses on the rights, benefits and welfare of individuals engaged in esports.

The bill defines esports as organised, competitive video gaming, at local or international level. It also defines an esports player as a person who engages in esports competitions, either as a professional or amateur player. The bill enumerates several rights of esports players, including:

1. The right to fair and just compensation and benefits;
2. The right to be free from discrimination on any grounds such as gender, sexual orientation or age;
3. The right to safe and healthy working conditions; and
4. The right to intellectual property protection over their gaming profiles and personas.

The bill also provides benefits and privileges for national esports players, including scholarship benefits for esports players who achieve victories in major international esports competitions. It also provides players with free medical services and free legal consultations for legal matters related to esports gaming, including contract negotiation and IP rights.

The bill establishes the National Esports Gamers’ Welfare Fund, which would provide financial assistance and incentives to national gamers who suffer from injuries, illnesses or disabilities arising from their participation in or preparation for competitions.

The bill has been referred by the Committee on Rules to the Committee on Youth and Sports Development and has been pending since 2023.

Senate Bill No. 2121 – Esports Act of 2023. Senate Bill No. 2121 of the 19th Congress introduces a parallel measure that similarly defines esports and proposes the establishment of a Philippine Electronic Sports Commission (PESC) as the central body responsible for overseeing and monitoring esports activities nationwide. Under the bill, the PESC would be mandated to:

1. Accredit esports organisations and participants;
2. Formulate and implement uniform rules and policies for esports events;
3. Promote international esports tournaments and exchanges;
4. Encourage scientific research and infrastructure development in esports;
5. Secure financial resources to support industry growth; and
6. Establish an esports industry support centre.

Filed on 3 May 2023, the bill is pending with the Committee on Sports.

Legislative outlook

Taken together, these pending measures reflect a growing consensus in congress that esports require dedicated governance and policy support beyond the existing administrative issuances of the GAB. If enacted, these bills could mark a turning point for the Philippine esports industry by providing statutory recognition, strengthening player rights, and institutionalising a coherent regulatory framework.

VILLARAZA & ANGANGCO (V&A LAW)
V&A Law Centre
11th Avenue corner 39th Street
Bonifacio Global City 1634
Metro Manila, Philippines
Tel: +632 8988 6088
Email: info@thefirmva.com

Back to top

---

Thailand’s regulatory landscape for esports and gaming

Thailand’s gaming sector has seen extraordinary growth in the past few years, and its market valuation today exceeds USD1.3 billion, marking it as the second-largest in Southeast Asia. Key factors driving this growth include a youthful, digitally engaged population, high rates of smartphone penetration, and an increase in affordable 5G services. In-game purchases – spanning virtual goods such as skins, battle passes and other cosmetic items – now constitute a major revenue stream, fuelled by free-to-play mobile titles and effortless digital wallet transactions.

The rise of active gamers has led to esports viewership reaching new records, as the number of esports participants is expected to nearly double from 9.8 million in 2021 to 18.7 million by 2027. The average fan spends, on average, five hours a week watching esports content. Major sponsorship deals, from telecoms and beverage brands to global partners, fuel this surge by supporting professional teams, funding tournaments and fostering grassroots development.

In the past decade, grassroots gaming communities and casual gaming have matured into a structured, competitive industry. Thailand has hosted more than 1,400 tournaments, and the top teams have earned close to USD30 million in prizemoney.

In 2025, Bangkok made history by hosting the Valorant Masters, one of the world’s premier esports tournaments, at the Impact Arena. The event brought together 44 of the globe’s top teams, competing for a USD500,000 prize pool. This marked the first time the tournament was held in Southeast Asia, underscoring Thailand’s emergence as a regional digital powerhouse.

The country’s creative prowess has even gone global, as Hollywood adapted the Thai-produced horror game Home Sweet Home into a movie that was released this year, Home Sweet Home: Rebirth, featuring celebrated Thai actors alongside international talent.

Esports in Thailand have evolved far beyond entertainment. It is a strategic tool for advancing digital literacy and youth development. Mahidol University’s “Buff to Build Number One” and the SCG Foundation’s “esports as a career path” initiatives highlight this trend. Government agencies such as the Digital Economy Promotion Agency regularly organise events and workshops aimed at enhancing the skill of young gamers, redefining gaming as a viable career option.

Building on its role in upskilling youth and catalysing new career pathways, the Thai government has now enshrined esports within its soft-power and sports policies – treating competitive gaming as a bona fide sport, funding athlete development alongside Olympians, and infusing major tournaments with Thai cultural motifs to project national identity and influence abroad.

Legal perspective on gaming

The gaming world is largely populated by minors – defined under Thai law as individuals under the age of 20. This legal status carries significant implications. Any transaction entered into by a minor is considered voidable, meaning a legal guardian (usually a parent) retains the right to rescind it.

While exceptions exist – such as wills or acts deemed necessary for the minor’s life – online gaming transactions usually fall outside these categories. As such, transactions made by minors in games may be legally challenged, especially if prior consent from a guardian was not obtained. Game developers and service providers, therefore, face uncertainty in relying on the validity of such transactions.

Closely related to this issue is the matter of personal data protection. Under Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA), the collection of personal data must be lawful and based on prior or concurrent consent, or other legal bases for processing data.

Obtaining valid consent requires careful consideration when the data subject is a minor. If the act of giving consent is not one that the minor may perform independently – such as acts not appropriate to their status or not necessary for their reasonable livelihood – then consent must also be obtained from the holder of parental authority. For minors not more than 10 years old, parental consent is mandatory.

This requirement poses enforcement challenges in the gaming context, where parents may not be able to effectively monitor or control their child’s access. For example, a minor’s acceptance of a game’s terms of service may not constitute valid consent under the PDPA, potentially rendering the collection and processing of personal data unlawful.

Beyond the issue of consent and data protection, another legal complexity arises in the nature of virtual assets. Thai property law distinguishes between “things” (tangible objects) and “property”, which includes both tangible and intangible items with value. In this context, in-game items and accounts may qualify as property.

However, unlike cryptocurrencies or digital securities, virtual assets in games lack formal legal recognition and protection. This gap creates challenges in consumer protection, particularly in transactions involving the purchase or trade of in-game items.

Legal evolution in gaming

2008: Current licensing regime. Under the Film and Video Act, 2008, games are classified as part of “videos”, although the act does not define games separately. The exhibition or distribution of games in Thailand requires prior approval from the Film and Video Committee, and operating a video distribution business without a licence is prohibited.

Non-compliance is subject to administrative and criminal penalties. However, the act is outdated and does not reflect the current nature of game regulation, prompting the development of new legislative drafts.

2021: Esports gains official recognition. Thailand marked a major milestone in 2021 by officially recognising esports as a professional sport. This recognition elevated esports athletes to the same legal status as traditional athletes, granting them several rights and protection (e.g. labour law and contractual rights). This was a foundational step towards legitimising the industry and setting standards for its future development.

2023: Regulatory reform attempts and public pushback. Two years later, in 2023, the government introduced the Draft Film and Game Act to replace the outdated 2008 act. The draft aimed to modernise regulation by defining “game”, and introducing a content rating system to safeguard public morality and national interests. It also proposed strict advertising controls and heavy administrative fines of up to THB5 million (USD135,000).

However, the draft faced strong public criticism. Stakeholders argued that the definition of “game” failed to reflect the unique nature of interactive media. The proposed rating system was seen as misaligned with international standards, and the severity of penalties raised concerns about disproportionate enforcement. Ultimately, the draft was abandoned, highlighting the need for a more industry-informed approach.

2025: A shift towards industry promotion and tailored regulation. In early 2025, a new legislative initiative – the Draft Game Industry Promotion Act – was introduced. This proposal responded directly to the shortcomings of the 2023 draft by separating games from films and offering a more tailored regulatory framework. Key provisions include:

1. Registration requirements for online game operators;
2. A game rating system aligned with global standards;
3. Oversight mechanisms to prevent illegal gambling through games;
4. Establishment of a dedicated fund to support industry development; and
5. Enhanced involvement of cyber police and a new regulatory board.

The draft also emphasises social responsibility, with measures to address the psychological impact of gaming on minors and promote digital literacy. Notably, the private sector played a more active role in shaping the draft, aiming to ensure practical and enforceable regulations.

2025: Soft power and strategic promotion. Alongside regulatory reform, 2025 also saw the emergence of the Soft Power Game Promotion Act, proposed by the Soft Power Game Sub-Committee. This initiative reflects growing recognition of gaming as a driver of Thailand’s creative economy.

The simultaneous introduction of multiple legislative drafts underscores a strong policy interest in both regulating and promoting the gaming sector.

Conclusion

Thailand is quickly emerging as a rising star in Asia’s esports and gaming landscape, as its exponential growth signals extraordinary potential. Although still trailing markets such as the USD40 billion US gaming market, the momentum is undeniable. Aligning regulation with the industry’s rapid pace and promoting innovation while safeguarding participants will be crucial.

While Thailand’s legislative process can stretch over three to five years, its extensive stakeholder consultations ensure the resulting policies are robust and future-ready. With continued support and reform, Thailand is set to become not only a regional hub, but possibly a global force in the digital arena.

BAKER MCKENZIE
195 One Bangkok Tower 4
30th-33rd Floors, Wireless Road
Lumphini, Pathum Wan
Bangkok 10330 Thailand
Tel: +66 2636 2000
Fax: +66 2636 2111
Email: Bangkok.Info@bakermckenzie.com

Back to top