The Delhi High Court has asked Meta to explain the criteria it uses to grant creators access to its Rights Manager copyright-protection tool after content creator Mohit Kumar, who operates under the name “Rise With Mohit”, alleged that his original videos were copied and then used by others to trigger copyright strikes against him.
The matter was heard by Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani on August 12, with the court questioning why genuine creators could be denied access to a tool that allegedly remained available to those accused of misusing it.
Justice Bhambhani compared the situation to “giving the key to the robber and not to the owner of the house” and said there appeared to be “some chinks in the armour, some loopholes” in Meta’s policy.
Meta told the court that the copyright strikes against the plaintiff had been reversed and removed content restored, while his accounts had not been suspended. The court has issued summons in the suit and listed the matter for September 24, alongside a connected creator dispute.
Court Questions Meta’s Safeguards
At the heart of the dispute is a question with growing importance for India’s creator economy: who gets the power to enforce copyright on social-media platforms, and how is that power verified?
Kumar has alleged that individuals downloaded his original videos, registered them through Meta’s Rights Manager and subsequently used copyright complaints against his content, while his own attempts to obtain access to the same protection mechanism were unsuccessful.
The court’s concern is therefore not simply about whether Meta should restrict access to Rights Manager, but whether its eligibility and verification process can reliably distinguish genuine rights holders from people attempting to exploit the system.
Meta, meanwhile, described Rights Manager to the court as a video, audio and image-matching tool developed for rights holders ranging from individual creators to media publishers, sports leagues and music labels.
Its own public documentation says the system can identify matching content and, depending on the rights holder’s permissions, allow actions such as blocking videos, claiming eligible advertising revenue, applying attribution or submitting copyright reports. Meta has previously said Page admins can apply for access and that it is working to make Rights Manager available to more creators.
A Growing Copyright Dispute
The latest case comes amid a series of disputes before the Delhi High Court over alleged misuse of Meta’s copyright-enforcement mechanisms.
Financial educator Pushkar Raj Thakur and digital creator Neeraj Joshi have separately alleged that unidentified individuals manipulated Facebook’s “Edit Post” functionality to make copied videos appear to have been published earlier, and then allegedly relied on those posts to support copyright complaints.
In Thakur’s case, Meta assured the court that his videos would not be removed on the basis of the disputed copyright complaints until the next hearing and that his account would not be disabled because of repeated strikes; the company also agreed to restore deleted videos after receiving their links.
In Joshi’s case, the High Court directed Meta to preserve his verified Instagram account, investigate the allegations and provide basic subscriber information and IP logs relating to suspected bad actors.
A separate PIL by creator Nitin Joshi has alleged an organised cyber-extortion racket in which fraudulent copyright complaints are allegedly used to pressure creators into paying money to restore content or accounts.
The court has sought responses from Meta and government authorities, while the petition has also called for a grievance mechanism involving human review rather than relying solely on automated processes. These allegations remain matters before the court and have not been judicially established.
The Logical Indian’s Perspective
The internet has transformed ordinary users into creators, entrepreneurs, educators and small businesses, making digital content an increasingly important source of livelihood. Copyright-protection tools such as Rights Manager can play a valuable role in ensuring that original work is not copied or commercially exploited without permission. But the same systems must also protect creators from wrongful claims.
When an automated copyright complaint can lead to content removal or potentially threaten an account built over years, creators deserve a transparent process, meaningful explanations and a fair opportunity to challenge mistakes.
Also read: Air India AI2379: 300-Foot Drop, Pilot Tests Positive for Marijuana; What Has Happened So Far
