Primer: YouTubers vs ANI: Fair-use in the spotlight
Prominent content creators have accused the news agency ANI of using YouTube's three-copyright strikes policy to force them into buying subscriptions to their video services. What is the problem exactly, and what are the two sides saying? Mint explains.
What is the allegation against ANI?
Creators such as Mohak Mangal, who make long videos explaining news and current affairs, often use short clips from news providers such as ANI in their content. They now say ANI has been reporting such videos for copyright violations. As per YouTube's policy, any channel that receives three copyright strikes is at risk of being deleted from the platform. Mangal alleged that representatives of ANI were using the threat of copyright strikes against his channel to force him to buy an ANI subscription—worth ₹10-40 lakh per year. He had used a nine-second clip from ANI footage for a video on Operation Sindoor.
What exactly is the problem here?
ANI says it is merely enforcing its copyright and protecting its intellectual property. But Mangal and other creators allege that this tactic–threatening their channels with copyright strikes and then offering annual subscriptions worth tens of lakhs of rupees—is practically 'extortion". They argue that using a few seconds of a clip, even if copyrighted, is legal under fair use exceptions to India's copyright laws. This is because, they say, their YouTube videos are meant to provide reporting, general knowledge and critique to the public, all purportedly part of fair dealings in matters of intellectual property rights.
At which stage is the legal battle?
No creator has moved a court of law against ANI and its alleged extortion. In his video on the issue, Mohak Mangal said he wrote an appeal to Ashwini Vaishnaw, minister of information and broadcasting. He also urged other creators facing ANI's copyright strikes to reach out to the minister with details of ANI's actions. The video has nearly 6 million views.
So does ANI have a case?
They might. But, earlier this month, in response to a report by The Reporters' Collective, the news agency said it 'invests heavily in original news gathering" and had the right to defend itself from copyright theft. The news organization also said that enforcing claims via YouTube's copyright strike policy was not extortion. ANI has sued Mangal for defamation in the Delhi High Court, along with creator Kunal Kamra and fact-checker Mohammed Zubair for sharing his video on ANI.
What does Indian law say about this?
The definition of fair use in India is rather narrow and does not completely capture the nuances of online content creation. Fair use clauses cover research and criticism but may not protect slick YouTube videos backed by ads and brand integration. Creators argue that using an 8-10 second clip is protected under fair use, but legal experts say copyright violation depends not just on quantitative use (the length of a clip) but also qualitative use—for example, if the clip is crucial to the content, like the hook line of a song.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
36 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Pak wanted India on its knees in 48 hrs, folded up in 8 hrs to talk: CDS
Chief of Defence Staff General Anil Chauhan said Tuesday that Pakistan wanted to bring India 'to its knees in 48 hours' with Operation Bunyan al-Marsoos on May 10, but the attacks 'folded up in 8 hours' after which Pakistan 'picked up the telephone and said they wanted to talk'. He made these remarks while delivering a lecture on 'Future Wars and Warfare' at the Savitribai Phule Pune University. Detailing the Pakistani response to Operation Sindoor, General Chauhan said Operation Bunyan al-Marsoos was 'launched by Pakistan on 10th of May at about 1 am' and 'its aim was to get India down to its knees in 48 hours. Multiple attacks were launched'. He said although India had actually hit only terror targets, the Pakistanis 'escalated this conflict… into the military domain'. Stating that armed forces are the most rational actors in conflict situations, he explained why Pakistan called India. 'I think that the rationale behind this… realisation coming in… stemmed from two facts. One is that they must have assumed that if they continued this mode, they are likely to lose much more. Hence, they picked up the telephone. And second, since they had struck us at multiple fronts, they still did not have the benefit of understanding what they had struck. So, they must have thought they must have struck and, hence, they would like to talk now. And if they don't, they will tend to lose more.' Later, after a couple of days, Pakistan must have realised that their attacks had failed, he said. 'So, these were the two factors which would have made them think. But it's only after, say, one or two days, they would have realised that all… the kind of attacks they had launched against us were not fortified and they had all kind of failed.' Responding to a student's question on the losses faced by Pakistan during the hostilities, General Chauhan said, 'When I was asked about losses on our side, I said these are not important. The results and how you act are important. So it would not be very correct to talk about the losses, numbers etc.' 'You see, in a match, suppose you go into a football match and you win 3-2… that's an even-sided match. But suppose you go into a cricket Test match and win by an innings, then there is no question of how many wickets and how many balls and how many players. It's an innings (victory),' he said. 'But since there is always this inquisitiveness as to the results of your strikes… At some point of time, we will take out this particular data, and share it, to answer the queries and inquisitiveness of people… who keep asking 'How many aircraft did we destroy? How many radars did we destroy?' We will make a rough assessment of that and come out with that shortly,' he said. He said the government's objective behind Operation Sindoor was not retribution but to draw the limits of tolerance with Pakistan. 'Let me talk about reason… Operation Sindoor, as far as the government is concerned, was not about retribution. I think it was about drawing these limits of tolerance… This state-sponsored terrorism from Pakistan had to stop, and Pakistan should not be able to hold India hostage to terror activities.' Another point made by the operation was that India was not going to live under the shadow of terror and nuclear blackmail, he said. He also spoke about the emotions of India's citizens. 'The emotion… among the people of India was revenge and retribution… and to get the perpetrators to justice. That I think was playing in everyone's mind, that is the kind of emotion and public sentiment that was happening. And at the end of it, there was probably some sort of satisfaction, (and also) anxiety. Anxiety during the operation.' On the risks involved during military operations, he said, 'You can't be 100 per cent prepared for every kind of contingency and you can't have 100 per cent of the information about that. So you are always groping a bit in the dark when you are carrying out military operations. In every military operation, there is an element of risk involved. The only thing is that it should be a calculated kind of a risk.' 'In a war, even if there are setbacks, we have to adapt, understand what went wrong and go out again.' He said as an organisation, one must have an offensive spirit. 'That's why I said in a couple of my interviews that losses are not important, the outcome is,' he said. He reiterated that Operation Sindoor was not over and that there was only temporary cessation of operations. Soham is a Correspondent with the Indian Express in Pune. A journalism graduate, he was a fact-checker before joining the Express. Soham currently covers education and is also interested in civic issues, health, human rights, and politics. ... Read More
Time of India
37 minutes ago
- Time of India
Why China 'turning off tap' may be another Pakistan bluff
GUWAHATI/NEW DELHI: Assam CM Himanta Biswa Sarma Monday demolished latest Pakistani scaremongering after India decisively stepped away from Indus Waters Treaty - what if China cuts off Brahmaputra's water supply to India? He called it a myth & cited hard data to prove the river slicing through Assam is a rain-fed watercourse that grows in India, not shrinks. "Let's dismantle this myth - not with fear, but with facts and national clarity," Sarma posted on X, adding: "Brahmaputra is not a river India depends on upstream - it is a rain-fed Indian river system, strengthened after entering Indian territory." According to Sarma, China's contribution to the river's flow is minimal, only 30-35%, mostly from glacial melt and limited Tibetan rainfall. The rest 65-70% is generated inside India by torrential monsoon rainfall across Arunachal, Assam, Nagaland, and Meghalaya. Sarma further listed major Indian tributaries feeding Brahmaputra - Subansiri, Lohit, Kameng, Manas, Dhansiri, Jia-Bharali, and Kopili, along with inflows from Khasi, Garo, and Jaintia Hills via rivers like Krishnai, Digaru, and Kulsi. If China ever does "turn off the tap", Sarma said it might actually reduce flood devastation in Assam, which displaces lakhs annually. At Tuting on India-China border in Arunachal's Upper Siang district, Brahmaputra's flow is 2,000-3,000 cubic metre per second - but swells to 15,000-20,000 cubic metre per second in Assam during monsoon. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 5 Books Warren Buffett Wants You to Read In 2025 Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo Backed by water governance experts, Sarma's post drew strong support from Nilanjan Ghosh, vice-president of Development Studies and senior director at Observer Research Foundation in Kolkata. Ghosh said China's upstream interventions will have "negligible or almost no effect" on Brahmaputra's overall flow. Brahmaputra originates at Angsi Glacier in Tibet, flows 1,625km as Yarlung Tsangpo before entering India where it runs 918km - as Siang, Dihang, then Brahmaputra - and finishes its 2,880km journey with a 337km stretch in Bangladesh, before meeting Ganga. Though China has announced plans to build a massive hydropower dam on Yarlung Tsangpo, Indian experts said Brahmaputra's scale and Indian monsoon strength make fears of water cuts largely unfounded. IDSA senior fellow Uttam Sinha, citing peer-reviewed data, said even during lean periods Yarlung Tsangpo's annual outflow from China is far lower than Brahmaputra's total discharge in India.
Time of India
42 minutes ago
- Time of India
Pakistan: Another top Jaish ultra dies a mysterious death
NEW DELHI: Maulana Abdul Aziz Esar, a top Jaish-e-Muhammed commander and a fierce proponent of the doctrine of Ghazwa-e-Hind, was found dead under mysterious circumstances in Pakistan's Bahawalpur on June 2. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now His burial was held at the markaz of JeM headquarters in Bahawalpur, indicating the place he held in the terror outfit. The markazi was among the hardest hit targets during . Over a dozen significant terror strikes in India, including 2019 , were planned here. The messages floated by the Jaish cadre on Telegram claimed Abdul suffered a sudden heart attack. However, there was no official word on the cause of death from Pakistan police. A resident of Ashrafwala in Pakistan's Punjab province, Abdul frequently threatened to break India into pieces and spewed venom against 'kafirs'. Just last month at a rally, he had threatened to snatch Kashmir from India. Enraged since Operation Sindoor, he was spotted on a video threatening infiltration of terrorists into India. "Mujahideen are coming, if you can handle it, then handle it, govt of Hindustan... otherwise, Mujahideen will snatch Kashmir from your jaws... Mujahideen have set out," said the rabble rouser maulana. At a recent rally, he threatened that India would meet the fate of Soviet Union and called upon Mujahideen to keep the flames of 'Ghazwa-e-Hind' burning.
