YouTube Copyright Controversy: In an escalating storm that has engulfed the Indian YouTube community, a number of top content creators have accused Asian News International (ANI) of misusing copyright laws to muzzle critical voices and rob them of their money. The row took a political turn when Rajya Sabha MP Saket Gokhale sent a letter to YouTube India seeking an explanation and responsibility. The case has sparked a national debate on freedom of speech, fair use, and misuse of copyright.
YouTube Copyright Controversy Explain
The Controversy started when YouTuber Mohak Mangal was issued two copyright strikes by ANI for taking merely a few seconds of their video. ANI allegedly asked for Rs. 50 lakh to have the strikes lifted. Not long after that, another content creator, Rajat Pawar, shared that ANI asked for Rs. 18 lakh for taking a 9-second clip.
These incidents have raised serious questions about ANI’s copyright policies and the ethics of demanding large sums for minimal usage.
“Piracy is not free speech: Why YouTubers must pay for ANI’s content” https://t.co/ruOiMj7cY9
— Smita Prakash (@smitaprakash) May 26, 2025
YouTubers Accuse ANI of Extortion
Multiple creators have now come forward alleging that ANI is targeting small independent voices and using copyright law as a tool for financial gain. The demands—ranging from Rs. 18 lakh to Rs. 50 lakh—have been described as “extortion” by many in the creator community.
“This is not copyright protection but daylight robbery,” a creator commented. The community believes that utilizing 5–10 second news clips under ‘fair use’ cannot lead to legal threats or exorbitant financial demands.
MP Saket Gokhale's Official Complaint to YouTube India
Having a very strong point of view, MP Saket Gokhale went to Twitter and posted that he had mailed a letter to YouTube India, pointing out the abuse of copyright strikes.
“News agencies having unofficial monopoly are threatening independent YouTubers and asking lakhs of rupees. This is very disturbing and affecting freedom of speech,” – Saket Gokhale.
He demanded a parliamentary inquiry and asked YouTube India to review its process of dealing with such copyright strike issues.
ANI Editor Smita Prakash Replies
Responding to the backlash, Smita Prakash, Editor at ANI, shared an article titled “Piracy is Not Free Speech: Why YouTubers Must Pay for ANI Content.”
She argued that even if it’s a 5-second clip, creators must pay for using ANI’s proprietary content. Smita received further criticism when she dismissed suggestions to make ANI’s subscription pricing more affordable, stating:
“You have no clue about ANI’s price structure. Calling our model a loot is uninformed.”
This response has further inflamed tensions, with critics claiming ANI is overreaching and stifling digital voices.
Dhruv Rathee Slams YouTube’s Silence
Popular YouTuber Dhruv Rathee also jumped into the debate, calling out YouTube itself for enabling ANI’s alleged exploitation.
“YouTube, why are you allowing this extortion racket to persist? You can stop it. Provide creators with an opportunity to remove clips shorter than 10 seconds prior to striking.” – Dhruv Rathee
He underlined the necessity of having a grace period or warning system before disabling monetization or striking videos, particularly in cases where copyrighted material is utilized under ‘fair use’ provisions.
The Larger Argument: Fair Use vs Copyright Assertions
This debate puts the continued discussion of fair use versus copyright enforcement under the spotlight. The majority of content creators hold the view that brief clips for commentary or criticism fall under fair use, particularly when the content is altered or utilized for public interest debate.
According to ANI and other media outlets, though, their content—no matter how brief—is still protected, and utilization of it without permission counts as piracy.
The matter now finds itself at a junction between safeguarding intellectual property and maintaining freedom of expression in India’s cyberworld.
Conclusion
The ANI vs YouTubers conflict is not merely a case of copyright—it’s a fight for the way ahead for independent journalism and content creation in India. As influential voices such as Saket Gokhale and Dhruv Rathee also join the protest, the heat is now being put on YouTube India to revisit their policies regarding copyright strikes.
Will YouTube come to the rescue of creators’ rights? Or will established media organizations continue to wield disproportionate influence over the online space?
The unfolding drama has already generated an urgent national conversation—one that will determine the future of free speech and fair use in India’s digital age.
