Asian News International (ANI), one of the biggest news organizations in India, is facing severe accusations of abusing YouTube’s copyright enforcement tools to demand significant payments from YouTubers, sparking a major scandal in the country’s digital creator ecosystem. The controversy started when a number of well-known producers, like political analyst Mohak Mangal, claimed that ANI was suing them for copyright violations for using their news footage in videos that were mostly about news analysis or commentary. These usage were often as short as nine or ten seconds.
The strikes, creators say, are not simply about protecting intellectual property. Instead, they allege ANI is using the threat of YouTube channel termination to demand payments ranging from ₹10 lakh to as much as ₹50 lakh to revoke the strikes and offer a license to use ANI’s footage. For many creators, whose livelihoods depend on their channels, the stakes are existential: YouTube’s three-strike policy means that multiple claims can result in permanent deletion of a channel and loss of years of work.
Creators Call ANI’s Demands “Extortion” and Threat to Free Speech:
The most high-profile case involves Mohak Mangal, who shared that ANI demanded ₹48 lakh plus GST to withdraw a strike on his 33-minute video, which contained just nine seconds of ANI footage. Mangal’s video, which supported the Indian Army’s Operation Sindoor, had garnered over two million views before being taken down by YouTube after ANI’s claim. In a letter to Union Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw, Mangal described ANI’s actions as “extortion” and warned that such practices threaten creative freedom, India’s digital creator economy, and the principle of fair use.
Other YouTubers have echoed these concerns, with some reporting demands of ₹15-18 lakh to have strikes revoked. The pressure is compounded by YouTube’s strict policies, which give creators only a short window—sometimes just seven days—to respond before their channels face deletion. Critics argue that this dynamic leaves creators vulnerable to what they describe as “blackmail” by copyright holders, especially when the sums demanded are far beyond what most independent creators can afford.
The controversy has sparked a wider debate about free speech and the power dynamics between large media organizations and independent digital creators. Influencers like Dhruv Rathee and Kunal Kamra have called ANI’s tactics an “extortion racket” and urged YouTube to take action to protect creators. The issue has also reignited calls for clearer and fairer copyright policies that balance the rights of content owners with the public interest in news commentary and education.
Fair Use, Copyright Law, and YouTube’s Policy Gaps:
At the heart of the dispute is the question of fair use—a legal doctrine that allows limited use of copyrighted material without permission for purposes such as criticism, commentary, news reporting, and education. Many creators argue that their use of short news clips, often under ten seconds, for commentary or analysis should qualify as fair use under Indian law and YouTube’s policies. However, YouTube’s guidelines leave the definition of fair use ambiguous, and the platform’s automated copyright system often favors large rights holders, making it difficult for creators to defend themselves.
YouTube allows copyright holders to identify and claim content they believe infringes their rights, leading to strikes against channels. While YouTube acknowledges that some uses fall under fair use or fair dealing, it leaves the final determination to copyright holders, not the platform itself. This creates a gray area that can be exploited by powerful organizations to pressure creators into costly licensing agreements or settlements.
In the case of ANI, multiple YouTubers have reported being offered expensive year-long licenses to continue using ANI’s content after paying large sums to have strikes lifted. While ANI maintains it is simply enforcing its legal rights, creators and digital rights advocates argue that the agency’s aggressive tactics amount to punitive leverage over smaller, independent voices.
Calls for Reform and the Future of India’s Digital Creator Economy:
The ANI copyright strike controversy has prompted calls for urgent reform of both YouTube’s copyright enforcement system and India’s copyright laws. Creators warn that the current system, which allows powerful rights holders to issue multiple strikes and demand large payments, risks stifling independent journalism, commentary, and digital creativity. Some have appealed directly to government officials, urging intervention to protect the country’s “digital ambassadors” and ensure that India’s creator economy can continue to thrive without fear of arbitrary takedowns or financial ruin.
The broader debate centers on how to balance the legitimate rights of content creators and news agencies with the need for a vibrant, diverse, and fair digital media landscape. As more creators come forward with similar stories, the pressure is mounting on both YouTube and policymakers to clarify what constitutes fair use, introduce safeguards against abuse of copyright enforcement, and support the growth of India’s burgeoning digital creator community.
For now, the standoff between ANI and YouTube creators remains unresolved, but the controversy has already sparked a vital national conversation about copyright, free speech, and the future of digital storytelling in India.
