Aquarium Land — Fishbowl World

What is Aquarium Land — Fishbowl World?

From recruitment to regulation, cybersecurity, tribal gaming, affiliates, gambling law, C-suite leaders and everything else in between, the campaign has shown that where roles, companies and backgrounds differ, many of the women we have honoured share a united drive to improve diversity within the sector.

This year sees the return of the majority of our judging panel for either the first, second or third consecutive year! Their confidence in the campaign, and how it’s run is a real testament to Most Influential Women, and how highly it is regarded across the sector, particularly as these types of lists and rankings gain popularity across industry media.

As of today, submissions for the 2026 iGB’s Most Influential Women list are open! We are once again looking for nominations that highlight all facets of the sector, and the women who are championing change and acting as leading forces within their company, or the sector more broadly.

About Aquarium Land — Fishbowl World

They took the dispute to international arbitration, claiming Laos had violated investment treaties protecting their businesses.

The two sides reached a settlement in 2014, but that agreement also fell apart, and the casino companies renewed their claims.

Ultimately, the gamble backfired.

About Aquarium Land — Fishbowl World

MDJS has turned to the courts to challenge offshore betting. On 12 January the Casablanca commercial court, sitting in summary proceeding, ordered Maroc Telecom, Orange Maroc and Inwi to block 19 named betting sites and local payment intermediaries. Non-compliance carried a penalty of MAD10,000 a day.

Medias24 reported the judge’s reasoning: “Internet access providers are technically the only parties able to end the manifestly unlawful disturbance resulting from access to unauthorised betting sites.”

The order was short-lived. The commercial court of appeal granted a stay on 26 January. According to Medias24’s 12 February report, it then annulled the order and rejected MDJS’ claim, ending the daily penalty. MDJS could still appeal.