Inside Telegram’s trust deficit: Piracy, privacy and the growing regulatory heat

“Telegram has been a piracy hub for years. Where was the government all this while?”That question, posted by a user on X after the Centre issued a fresh notice to Telegram over rampant online piracy, reflects a growing sentiment around one of the world’s most popular messaging platforms.Over the past month alone, Telegram has found itself at the centre of multiple controversies in India. The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) has now asked the company to submit an Action Taken Report (ATR) within 15 days detailing systemic measures to curb the circulation of pirated films and OTT content.Earlier, the platform came under scrutiny over the alleged circulation of leaked examination papers during the NEET controversy. More recently, it was among the messaging services that received government notices over its username feature amid concerns around fraud and impersonation.Separately, investigators probing Instagram advertisements allegedly promoting child sexual abuse material (CSAM) found that some of those ads redirected users to Telegram channels that reportedly charged ₹99 for access to abusive content.Individually, each case concerns a different form of online harm. Together, they raise a larger question: why does Telegram repeatedly feature in investigations involving piracy, scams and illegal content? And if the platform has become such a recurring concern, why hasn’t India simply banned it?The answer is more complicated than it appears.A shift from takedowns to platform accountabilityThe government’s latest notice marks a significant shift in its approach to regulating intermediaries.Rather than directing Telegram to remove specific channels sharing pirated content, the MIB has asked the platform to fundamentally strengthen its anti-piracy systems. The ministry said it had repeatedly notified Telegram about infringing copies of films and other audio-visual content, with individual URLs and channels being disabled. Yet, according to the notice, the same content continued to reappear through mirror channels, successor groups, bots and other mechanisms.The ministry argued that “no effective, systemic, or platform-wide action” had been taken and warned that a “purely reactive, channel-by-channel takedown approach” may no longer satisfy the due diligence obligations expected of intermediaries under the Information Technology Rules, 2021.Telegram has now been directed to proactively detect and remove infringing content, prevent repeat uploads, strengthen its grievance redressal system, preserve records related to copyright violations and act against repeat offenders, including channels, groups, bots, administrators and associated entities involved in the dissemination or monetisation of pirated content.The communication signals a broader regulatory shift. Rather than focusing solely on content removal after complaints are filed, the government is increasingly demanding that platforms build systems capable of preventing recurring abuse.Telegram’s growing list of regulatory challengesThe piracy notice is only the latest in a series of regulatory flashpoints involving Telegram.In June, the platform came under scrutiny after authorities investigated the circulation of leaked examination papers ahead of the NEET (UG) 2026 re-examination. The government temporarily restricted access to Telegram between June 16 and June 22 and directed the platform to disable its message-editing feature until June 30.Days later, Telegram received another government notice, this time over its username system. Alongside Signal, the messaging platform was asked to explain how its username feature prevents impersonation, cyber fraud and misuse by anonymous actors. The move followed similar concerns raised with WhatsApp over its proposed username rollout.Telegram’s name also surfaced during investigations into Instagram advertisements allegedly promoting child sexual abuse material. According to government sources, some advertisements directed users towards Telegram channels that allegedly sold abusive content through paid subscriptions.The recurring appearance of Telegram across unrelated investigations has intensified questions over whether the platform’s privacy-centric architecture has inadvertently made it attractive for illegal activities.Piracy is costing India’s creative economy billionsThe government’s latest intervention is also driven by the economic consequences of digital piracy.According to the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting’s report on the impact of piracy on India’s video sector and creative economy, the country’s online video industry generated an estimated $4.2 billion in 2024, with around 75% of revenues coming from advertising and the remaining 25% from subscriptions.However, the report says the sector’s growth is being significantly constrained by widespread digital piracy.Around 90 million users accessed pirated video content in 2024, resulting in revenue losses of approximately $1.2 billion, equivalent to nearly 10% of the legal online video industry.If left unchecked, the ministry projects that piracy could affect 158 million users by 2029, increasing cumulative revenue losses to $2.4 billion.The report specifically identifies Telegram, IPTV networks and third-party applications as major avenues through which premium content is illegally distributed. As films and web series routinely appear on these platforms shortly after release, many viewers bypass legitimate subscription services altogether.Although India had an estimated 125 million subscription video-on-demand (SVOD) subscriptions in 2024, household penetration remains only around 10%, significantly below comparable international markets. The ministry attributes part of this gap to the easy availability of pirated content, which continues to undermine subscription growth despite sustained investments by streaming platforms in original programming.The report estimates that effective anti-piracy measures could help recover nearly $1 billion in industry revenue by 2029, generate an additional $500 million in content investment and support the creation of approximately 47,000 jobs.The problem extends well beyond moviesIndustry observers argue that piracy on Telegram has evolved beyond films and OTT content.One educator recently described on LinkedIn how students repeatedly approached him after purchasing what they believed were legitimate online courses through Telegram channels, only to discover they had been defrauded.“Many students have contacted me saying, ‘Sir, someone sold us your course through a Telegram channel. We paid the money, but later realised it was a fraud,’” he wrote.He argued that enforcement should not stop with films and web series but also address educational content piracy, fake course sales, examination leaks and digital fraud.The experience reflects a broader concern that illegal distribution networks operating on messaging platforms increasingly affect creators, educators and consumers alike.Why a ban may not solve the problemDespite repeated controversies, experts say banning Telegram is unlikely to be a silver bullet.One industry executive, speaking on condition of anonymity, said enforcement itself poses significant challenges.“Banning platforms is extremely difficult in today’s environment. At a top level, bans can be announced, but with the widespread use of VPNs, it is almost impossible to enforce a 100% ban,” the executive said.Another industry observer noted that Telegram’s technical architecture makes outright blocking particularly difficult.The platform supports proxy connections, including its built-in MTProto proxy protocol, allowing users to bypass network restrictions. Telegram has also historically resisted pressure from governments around the world. Russia famously attempted to block the platform in 2018, only to lift the ban two years later after millions of users continued accessing the service through technical workarounds.Technology experts say outright bans often shift determined users towards VPNs, proxies or mirror services without necessarily reducing piracy or criminal activity. Instead, such measures can make investigations more difficult by pushing offenders towards harder-to-monitor platforms.That is one reason regulators globally have increasingly moved away from blanket bans towards demanding greater accountability from intermediaries themselves.The road aheadWhether Telegram can satisfy the government’s latest demands remains uncertain.The platform was built around privacy, encryption and minimal interference with user communications. Those same characteristics have also made it an attractive channel for piracy networks, fraudsters and other bad actors.India’s latest notice suggests regulators are no longer willing to accept reactive compliance. Instead, they expect platforms to proactively identify repeat offenders, prevent the reappearance of illegal content and build stronger safeguards into their systems.Telegram today sits at the intersection of many of the challenges confronting digital regulation: copyright infringement, examination leaks, cyber fraud, child safety and online anonymity.For the government, the objective appears to be evolving from policing individual pieces of content to demanding accountability for the way platforms are designed and governed.Whether Telegram can meet those expectations without fundamentally changing the principles on which it was built may shape not only its future in India, but also the next phase of regulation for encrypted messaging platforms worldwide.