News agency Asian News International (ANI) has been accused by several Indian content creators of allegedly demanding large sums of money for short clips of its copyrighted content used in YouTube videos. The move has sparked a fierce debate within the creator community about fair use and copyright enforcement.

What are the allegations?

Several well-known YouTubers have claimed that ANI is demanding lakhs of rupees for the use of only a few seconds of video footage. The creators argue that these short clips fall under the principle of fair use, a concept that allows limited use of copyrighted material without permission, particularly for commentary or criticism.

Some view ANI’s approach as an attempt to silence smaller creators through the threat of copyright strikes. Others maintain that using any copyrighted content without permission is a legal violation, regardless of intent or duration.

Who has spoken out?

YouTuber Mohak Mangal, who has over 4 million subscribers, was among the first to speak out publicly. In a video, he alleged that an ANI employee had pressured him to pay Rs 50 lakh or face the risk of his channel being deleted.

In audio played during the video, a person said to be from ANI is allegedly heard saying: "You used strike footage without my permission. I put a claim on YouTube; they have put a copyright strike. If you want to do it, do it, sir. You will surely lose your channel."

Mangal said the first copyright strike came from an 11-second ANI clip in a 16-minute video. A second strike followed for using a 9-second ANI clip in a 38-minute video on Operation Sindoor.

Rajat Pawar, another creator with nearly 3.5 million subscribers, claimed ANI demanded Rs 18 lakh from him. He said his channel already has two copyright strikes and he fears a third may lead to permanent removal.

According to Pawar, even after offering to remove all ANI clips and pledging not to use them again, he was told he would have to buy a subscription to have the strikes withdrawn.

What do other creators say?

The issue has gained traction among several prominent YouTubers. Comedian Ashish Solanki and educational channel ‘Physics by Pankaj Sir’ have voiced support for the affected creators.

Nitish Rajput, with over 7 million subscribers, called on YouTube to protect creators who have spent years building their platforms. Labour Law Advisor, known for videos on personal finance and boasting over 5 million followers, praised those bringing the issue into public view.

Comedian Kunal Kamra took a stronger stance, saying, “YouTube India must be held accountable and should ban ANI from its platform on grounds of blackmailing creator.”

What is ANI’s response?

ANI has not issued any official statement regarding the allegations. However, its editor-in-chief Smita Prakash shared a post on social media making a remark aimed at another YouTuber over copyright issues.

What is a copyright strike?

Copyright gives creators legal control over the use of their work. On YouTube, creators are expected to upload only the content they own or have explicit permission to use. Uploading someone else’s video, music, or programme clips without permission can lead to a copyright strike.

YouTube’s policy states: “Creators should only upload videos that they have made or that they’re authorised to use. That means they should not upload videos that they didn’t make, or use content in their videos that someone else owns the copyright to, such as music tracks, snippets of copyrighted programmes or videos made by other users, without necessary authorisations.”

The platform typically warns users for first-time violations. If content breaches occur again within 90 days, it may lead to a copyright strike. Three strikes within this window can result in permanent deletion of the channel.

  • First strike: Uploading is disabled for one week.
  • Second strike (within 90 days): Ban extends to two weeks.
  • Third strike: Channel may be permanently deleted.

What about fair use?

Fair use is a legal doctrine that allows limited use of copyrighted material without permission, usually for purposes such as commentary, criticism, news reporting, education, or research. Whether a use qualifies as fair use depends on factors like the purpose of use, the nature of the original work, how much is used, and the effect on the market value of the original.

While fair use is widely accepted in principle, its interpretation varies depending on local copyright laws and enforcement. In India, the lines are not always clearly drawn, especially in digital platforms where commentary channels often rely on brief clips to support their content.