Question Description
Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.India is emerging as a hub for online fantasy sports. According to a report by KPMG, the number of users in the country participating in online fantasy gaming platforms has grown from a mere 2 million in June 2016 to a staggering 90 million by December 2019, overtaking the US as the largest online fantasy sports market. This exponential rise in the user base has led to a near tripling of the industrys revenues — from Rs 920 crore in 2018-19 to Rs 2,470 crore in 2019-20. Venture capital funding in the sector has also skyrocketed — from $25 million in 2015 to $337 million last year. However, notwithstanding this striking growth, and because of it, some contentious issues need to be addressed.First, different courts and state governments are in the midst of debating its legality. At least six petitions have been filed in courts seeking a ban on online gambling and fantasy sports and some states prohibit online gaming. Attempts to curb the growth of this sector, however, by making it illegal or classifying it as gambling are misdirected. Second, the absence of a unified regulatory regime has meant that different states have differing regulations regarding online gaming. Companies thus have to engage with each state differently, despite operating on a pan-India basis through the online platform. This ends up increasing business uncertainty, and goes against the principle of ease of doing business. This, as the Niti Aayog paper also notes, leads to consumers having "differential rights", and can result in "forum/jurisdiction shopping".There is a need to put in place a unified regulatory architecture, bringing an end to the multiplicity of regimes. Such a framework, with strong checks and balances, would usher in greater accountability and transparency, improve the ease of doing business while also keeping errant players in check.[Extracted with edits and revision, from Editorials, The Indian Express]Q.The author thinks that while arguing in favor of a single regulatory regime.a)Central regulations overrule state regulations in all respects.b)Online gambling in some states is no longer available in any way, shape, or formc)Only the central rules must be followed by any firm.d)It should be a legal right for people to gamble.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2025 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.India is emerging as a hub for online fantasy sports. According to a report by KPMG, the number of users in the country participating in online fantasy gaming platforms has grown from a mere 2 million in June 2016 to a staggering 90 million by December 2019, overtaking the US as the largest online fantasy sports market. This exponential rise in the user base has led to a near tripling of the industrys revenues — from Rs 920 crore in 2018-19 to Rs 2,470 crore in 2019-20. Venture capital funding in the sector has also skyrocketed — from $25 million in 2015 to $337 million last year. However, notwithstanding this striking growth, and because of it, some contentious issues need to be addressed.First, different courts and state governments are in the midst of debating its legality. At least six petitions have been filed in courts seeking a ban on online gambling and fantasy sports and some states prohibit online gaming. Attempts to curb the growth of this sector, however, by making it illegal or classifying it as gambling are misdirected. Second, the absence of a unified regulatory regime has meant that different states have differing regulations regarding online gaming. Companies thus have to engage with each state differently, despite operating on a pan-India basis through the online platform. This ends up increasing business uncertainty, and goes against the principle of ease of doing business. This, as the Niti Aayog paper also notes, leads to consumers having "differential rights", and can result in "forum/jurisdiction shopping".There is a need to put in place a unified regulatory architecture, bringing an end to the multiplicity of regimes. Such a framework, with strong checks and balances, would usher in greater accountability and transparency, improve the ease of doing business while also keeping errant players in check.[Extracted with edits and revision, from Editorials, The Indian Express]Q.The author thinks that while arguing in favor of a single regulatory regime.a)Central regulations overrule state regulations in all respects.b)Online gambling in some states is no longer available in any way, shape, or formc)Only the central rules must be followed by any firm.d)It should be a legal right for people to gamble.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.India is emerging as a hub for online fantasy sports. According to a report by KPMG, the number of users in the country participating in online fantasy gaming platforms has grown from a mere 2 million in June 2016 to a staggering 90 million by December 2019, overtaking the US as the largest online fantasy sports market. This exponential rise in the user base has led to a near tripling of the industrys revenues — from Rs 920 crore in 2018-19 to Rs 2,470 crore in 2019-20. Venture capital funding in the sector has also skyrocketed — from $25 million in 2015 to $337 million last year. However, notwithstanding this striking growth, and because of it, some contentious issues need to be addressed.First, different courts and state governments are in the midst of debating its legality. At least six petitions have been filed in courts seeking a ban on online gambling and fantasy sports and some states prohibit online gaming. Attempts to curb the growth of this sector, however, by making it illegal or classifying it as gambling are misdirected. Second, the absence of a unified regulatory regime has meant that different states have differing regulations regarding online gaming. Companies thus have to engage with each state differently, despite operating on a pan-India basis through the online platform. This ends up increasing business uncertainty, and goes against the principle of ease of doing business. This, as the Niti Aayog paper also notes, leads to consumers having "differential rights", and can result in "forum/jurisdiction shopping".There is a need to put in place a unified regulatory architecture, bringing an end to the multiplicity of regimes. Such a framework, with strong checks and balances, would usher in greater accountability and transparency, improve the ease of doing business while also keeping errant players in check.[Extracted with edits and revision, from Editorials, The Indian Express]Q.The author thinks that while arguing in favor of a single regulatory regime.a)Central regulations overrule state regulations in all respects.b)Online gambling in some states is no longer available in any way, shape, or formc)Only the central rules must be followed by any firm.d)It should be a legal right for people to gamble.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.India is emerging as a hub for online fantasy sports. According to a report by KPMG, the number of users in the country participating in online fantasy gaming platforms has grown from a mere 2 million in June 2016 to a staggering 90 million by December 2019, overtaking the US as the largest online fantasy sports market. This exponential rise in the user base has led to a near tripling of the industrys revenues — from Rs 920 crore in 2018-19 to Rs 2,470 crore in 2019-20. Venture capital funding in the sector has also skyrocketed — from $25 million in 2015 to $337 million last year. However, notwithstanding this striking growth, and because of it, some contentious issues need to be addressed.First, different courts and state governments are in the midst of debating its legality. At least six petitions have been filed in courts seeking a ban on online gambling and fantasy sports and some states prohibit online gaming. Attempts to curb the growth of this sector, however, by making it illegal or classifying it as gambling are misdirected. Second, the absence of a unified regulatory regime has meant that different states have differing regulations regarding online gaming. Companies thus have to engage with each state differently, despite operating on a pan-India basis through the online platform. This ends up increasing business uncertainty, and goes against the principle of ease of doing business. This, as the Niti Aayog paper also notes, leads to consumers having "differential rights", and can result in "forum/jurisdiction shopping".There is a need to put in place a unified regulatory architecture, bringing an end to the multiplicity of regimes. Such a framework, with strong checks and balances, would usher in greater accountability and transparency, improve the ease of doing business while also keeping errant players in check.[Extracted with edits and revision, from Editorials, The Indian Express]Q.The author thinks that while arguing in favor of a single regulatory regime.a)Central regulations overrule state regulations in all respects.b)Online gambling in some states is no longer available in any way, shape, or formc)Only the central rules must be followed by any firm.d)It should be a legal right for people to gamble.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.India is emerging as a hub for online fantasy sports. According to a report by KPMG, the number of users in the country participating in online fantasy gaming platforms has grown from a mere 2 million in June 2016 to a staggering 90 million by December 2019, overtaking the US as the largest online fantasy sports market. This exponential rise in the user base has led to a near tripling of the industrys revenues — from Rs 920 crore in 2018-19 to Rs 2,470 crore in 2019-20. Venture capital funding in the sector has also skyrocketed — from $25 million in 2015 to $337 million last year. However, notwithstanding this striking growth, and because of it, some contentious issues need to be addressed.First, different courts and state governments are in the midst of debating its legality. At least six petitions have been filed in courts seeking a ban on online gambling and fantasy sports and some states prohibit online gaming. Attempts to curb the growth of this sector, however, by making it illegal or classifying it as gambling are misdirected. Second, the absence of a unified regulatory regime has meant that different states have differing regulations regarding online gaming. Companies thus have to engage with each state differently, despite operating on a pan-India basis through the online platform. This ends up increasing business uncertainty, and goes against the principle of ease of doing business. This, as the Niti Aayog paper also notes, leads to consumers having "differential rights", and can result in "forum/jurisdiction shopping".There is a need to put in place a unified regulatory architecture, bringing an end to the multiplicity of regimes. Such a framework, with strong checks and balances, would usher in greater accountability and transparency, improve the ease of doing business while also keeping errant players in check.[Extracted with edits and revision, from Editorials, The Indian Express]Q.The author thinks that while arguing in favor of a single regulatory regime.a)Central regulations overrule state regulations in all respects.b)Online gambling in some states is no longer available in any way, shape, or formc)Only the central rules must be followed by any firm.d)It should be a legal right for people to gamble.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.India is emerging as a hub for online fantasy sports. According to a report by KPMG, the number of users in the country participating in online fantasy gaming platforms has grown from a mere 2 million in June 2016 to a staggering 90 million by December 2019, overtaking the US as the largest online fantasy sports market. This exponential rise in the user base has led to a near tripling of the industrys revenues — from Rs 920 crore in 2018-19 to Rs 2,470 crore in 2019-20. Venture capital funding in the sector has also skyrocketed — from $25 million in 2015 to $337 million last year. However, notwithstanding this striking growth, and because of it, some contentious issues need to be addressed.First, different courts and state governments are in the midst of debating its legality. At least six petitions have been filed in courts seeking a ban on online gambling and fantasy sports and some states prohibit online gaming. Attempts to curb the growth of this sector, however, by making it illegal or classifying it as gambling are misdirected. Second, the absence of a unified regulatory regime has meant that different states have differing regulations regarding online gaming. Companies thus have to engage with each state differently, despite operating on a pan-India basis through the online platform. This ends up increasing business uncertainty, and goes against the principle of ease of doing business. This, as the Niti Aayog paper also notes, leads to consumers having "differential rights", and can result in "forum/jurisdiction shopping".There is a need to put in place a unified regulatory architecture, bringing an end to the multiplicity of regimes. Such a framework, with strong checks and balances, would usher in greater accountability and transparency, improve the ease of doing business while also keeping errant players in check.[Extracted with edits and revision, from Editorials, The Indian Express]Q.The author thinks that while arguing in favor of a single regulatory regime.a)Central regulations overrule state regulations in all respects.b)Online gambling in some states is no longer available in any way, shape, or formc)Only the central rules must be followed by any firm.d)It should be a legal right for people to gamble.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.India is emerging as a hub for online fantasy sports. According to a report by KPMG, the number of users in the country participating in online fantasy gaming platforms has grown from a mere 2 million in June 2016 to a staggering 90 million by December 2019, overtaking the US as the largest online fantasy sports market. This exponential rise in the user base has led to a near tripling of the industrys revenues — from Rs 920 crore in 2018-19 to Rs 2,470 crore in 2019-20. Venture capital funding in the sector has also skyrocketed — from $25 million in 2015 to $337 million last year. However, notwithstanding this striking growth, and because of it, some contentious issues need to be addressed.First, different courts and state governments are in the midst of debating its legality. At least six petitions have been filed in courts seeking a ban on online gambling and fantasy sports and some states prohibit online gaming. Attempts to curb the growth of this sector, however, by making it illegal or classifying it as gambling are misdirected. Second, the absence of a unified regulatory regime has meant that different states have differing regulations regarding online gaming. Companies thus have to engage with each state differently, despite operating on a pan-India basis through the online platform. This ends up increasing business uncertainty, and goes against the principle of ease of doing business. This, as the Niti Aayog paper also notes, leads to consumers having "differential rights", and can result in "forum/jurisdiction shopping".There is a need to put in place a unified regulatory architecture, bringing an end to the multiplicity of regimes. Such a framework, with strong checks and balances, would usher in greater accountability and transparency, improve the ease of doing business while also keeping errant players in check.[Extracted with edits and revision, from Editorials, The Indian Express]Q.The author thinks that while arguing in favor of a single regulatory regime.a)Central regulations overrule state regulations in all respects.b)Online gambling in some states is no longer available in any way, shape, or formc)Only the central rules must be followed by any firm.d)It should be a legal right for people to gamble.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.India is emerging as a hub for online fantasy sports. According to a report by KPMG, the number of users in the country participating in online fantasy gaming platforms has grown from a mere 2 million in June 2016 to a staggering 90 million by December 2019, overtaking the US as the largest online fantasy sports market. This exponential rise in the user base has led to a near tripling of the industrys revenues — from Rs 920 crore in 2018-19 to Rs 2,470 crore in 2019-20. Venture capital funding in the sector has also skyrocketed — from $25 million in 2015 to $337 million last year. However, notwithstanding this striking growth, and because of it, some contentious issues need to be addressed.First, different courts and state governments are in the midst of debating its legality. At least six petitions have been filed in courts seeking a ban on online gambling and fantasy sports and some states prohibit online gaming. Attempts to curb the growth of this sector, however, by making it illegal or classifying it as gambling are misdirected. Second, the absence of a unified regulatory regime has meant that different states have differing regulations regarding online gaming. Companies thus have to engage with each state differently, despite operating on a pan-India basis through the online platform. This ends up increasing business uncertainty, and goes against the principle of ease of doing business. This, as the Niti Aayog paper also notes, leads to consumers having "differential rights", and can result in "forum/jurisdiction shopping".There is a need to put in place a unified regulatory architecture, bringing an end to the multiplicity of regimes. Such a framework, with strong checks and balances, would usher in greater accountability and transparency, improve the ease of doing business while also keeping errant players in check.[Extracted with edits and revision, from Editorials, The Indian Express]Q.The author thinks that while arguing in favor of a single regulatory regime.a)Central regulations overrule state regulations in all respects.b)Online gambling in some states is no longer available in any way, shape, or formc)Only the central rules must be followed by any firm.d)It should be a legal right for people to gamble.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.India is emerging as a hub for online fantasy sports. According to a report by KPMG, the number of users in the country participating in online fantasy gaming platforms has grown from a mere 2 million in June 2016 to a staggering 90 million by December 2019, overtaking the US as the largest online fantasy sports market. This exponential rise in the user base has led to a near tripling of the industrys revenues — from Rs 920 crore in 2018-19 to Rs 2,470 crore in 2019-20. Venture capital funding in the sector has also skyrocketed — from $25 million in 2015 to $337 million last year. However, notwithstanding this striking growth, and because of it, some contentious issues need to be addressed.First, different courts and state governments are in the midst of debating its legality. At least six petitions have been filed in courts seeking a ban on online gambling and fantasy sports and some states prohibit online gaming. Attempts to curb the growth of this sector, however, by making it illegal or classifying it as gambling are misdirected. Second, the absence of a unified regulatory regime has meant that different states have differing regulations regarding online gaming. Companies thus have to engage with each state differently, despite operating on a pan-India basis through the online platform. This ends up increasing business uncertainty, and goes against the principle of ease of doing business. This, as the Niti Aayog paper also notes, leads to consumers having "differential rights", and can result in "forum/jurisdiction shopping".There is a need to put in place a unified regulatory architecture, bringing an end to the multiplicity of regimes. Such a framework, with strong checks and balances, would usher in greater accountability and transparency, improve the ease of doing business while also keeping errant players in check.[Extracted with edits and revision, from Editorials, The Indian Express]Q.The author thinks that while arguing in favor of a single regulatory regime.a)Central regulations overrule state regulations in all respects.b)Online gambling in some states is no longer available in any way, shape, or formc)Only the central rules must be followed by any firm.d)It should be a legal right for people to gamble.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.