The Delhi High Court has asked Meta to explain how creators and copyright holders are granted access to its Rights Manager tool, following allegations that the platform’s copyright-protection system was misused to target original content.
The matter came before Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani during a case filed by content creator and business coach Mohit Kumar, who operates the social media handle Rise With Mohit.
Kumar alleged that individuals copied his original videos and submitted them to Meta’s Rights Manager while falsely claiming ownership. The alleged registrations were subsequently used to initiate copyright strikes against his social media accounts.
According to Kumar’s legal team, he had applied for access to Rights Manager three times but was rejected without being provided with specific reasons. His lawyers also questioned why some creators with smaller audiences had reportedly received access while an established creator with significant engagement and commercial collaborations had not.
The creator further claimed that the alleged copyright actions had consequences beyond the temporary removal of his content. They affected audience engagement, business collaborations and his ability to promote and sell his courses.
Meta told the court that the disputed copyright strikes had already been reversed following technical verification. The company also confirmed that the affected content had been restored and Kumar’s accounts had not been suspended.
The court has now directed Meta to place on record its eligibility requirements and rules for granting Rights Manager access. It has also sought details regarding the circumstances under which applications for the tool can be rejected.
The court observed that complaints involving the misuse of copyright-enforcement mechanisms appear to be recurring in disputes involving content creators. The issue has consequently contributed to an increasing number of legal proceedings.
The case highlights a wider challenge for social media platforms. Copyright-protection systems must be effective enough to protect genuine creators, but they also need safeguards to prevent false ownership claims from being used against legitimate content owners.
The matter is scheduled to be considered again on September 24, when similar cases are also expected to come before the court. The proceedings could provide greater clarity on how platforms such as Meta should balance automated copyright enforcement with transparency, accountability and protection against fraudulent claims.
nandita sharma
