Delhi HC questioned Meta’s Rights Manager policy after a creator alleged misuse of copyright claims, directing the company to disclose access rules and safeguards.
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday questioned Meta’s policy for granting access to its copyright-protection tool on Facebook and Instagram after a creator alleged that unauthorised users were exploiting it to falsely claim ownership of original videos. Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani directed Meta to furnish details of its Rights Manager policy, including eligibility requirements and the criteria used to assess access requests.
The Delhi HC’s remarks came while hearing a suit filed by Mohit Kumar, an artificial intelligence, e-commerce, and business coach who creates educational content.
Kumar claimed that some individuals downloaded his original videos and later exploited Meta’s Rights Manager to falsely assert copyright ownership over the content.. He told the Court that although he was the original creator, he could not himself use the same mechanism to protect his content because his applications for access to the tool had been rejected, reported ANI.
Justice Bhambhani also reportedly questioned the social media giant why access was being limited to a tool specifically designed to enable content creators to safeguard their intellectual property.
Kumar’s counsel submitted that he had applied for access to the Rights Manager three times but was rejected without being given clear reasons. The petitioner claimed that, in contrast, individuals with only a few hundred followers appeared to have obtained access to the facility, despite Kumar having substantial engagement and commercial collaborations.
The Rights Manager tool enables eligible rights holders to identify matching content on Meta platforms and take measures such as monitoring or blocking material that allegedly uses their copyrighted work.
The petitioner argued that the alleged misuse of the system could have serious consequences for genuine creators. According to his case, fraudulent copyright strikes can lead to the removal of original content and potentially threaten years of work, monetisation, brand collaborations, and other business opportunities.
Meta, however, informed the Court that the copyright strikes against Kumar had been reversed and that content removed pursuant to those strikes had been reinstated. The company also stated that Kumar’s accounts had never been suspended and remained accessible.
Meta further said that, subject to technical verification, Kumar’s accounts would not be taken down on the basis of the disputed copyright strikes.
On the issue of Rights Manager access, Meta’s counsel said the company would examine Kumar’s application after verifying his claims and agreed to place the relevant policy and eligibility criteria before the Court.
The Court also directed that any content removed due to allegedly fraudulent copyright strikes should be restored if Kumar provides sufficient material establishing that the content belongs to him. The judge further observed that the concerns raised in the case were not isolated and that similar issues involving digital creators had come before the Court. “There are some chinks in the armour; some loopholes have been noticed. We better sort it out,” Justice Bhambhani observed, underlining the need to examine the safeguards surrounding Meta’s copyright enforcement mechanism.
