Why are scammers getting Meta’s copyright protection tool but not creators? Delhi High Court asks

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday asked Meta why established content creators are denied access to Meta’s rights manager tool even as scammers appear to be able to use it to issue fraudulent copyright strikes against original content [Mohit Kumar v. John Doe/Ashok Kumar and Others].

Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani asked Meta to place on record its policy and eligibility criteria for granting access to rights manager, a free content-protection tool offered by the company.

The Court also asked Meta to explain the basis on which applications for access to the tool are rejected.

“Why doesn’t everybody have access to it then?” the Court asked.

The suit was filed by Mohit Kumar, an artificial intelligence, business and e-commerce coach who creates educational content on social media under the handle “Rise With Mohit”.

Kumar alleged that scammers had downloaded his original videos and registered them with Meta’s rights manager as their own. They then allegedly used the tool to issue copyright strikes against Kumar’s accounts.

Rights Manager identifies matching content uploaded on Facebook and Instagram. A person with access to the tool can choose to monitor, block or initiate action against content that matches material claimed by them.

Kumar’s counsel told the Court that he had applied for access to the tool three times but was rejected without any clear reason. It was argued that persons with only a few hundred followers appeared to have secured access, while established creators with significant engagement and brand collaborations were denied the same facility.

"It is like giving the key to the robber and not to the owner of the house,” the Court remarked.

The counsel further contended that fraudulent copyright strikes could cause a genuine creator’s account to disappear overnight, wiping out years of work, monetisation, brand collaborations and business opportunities.

Meta informed the Court that the fraudulent strikes against Kumar have been reversed and that the content removed pursuant to those strikes have been reinstated. It added that Kumar’s accounts were never suspended and continued to remain accessible.

The company also stated that subject to technical verification, Kumar’s accounts would not be taken down on the basis of the disputed copyright strikes.

Meta’s counsel said the company would examine Kumar’s application for rights manager access after verifying his claims. The counsel also agreed to place the relevant policy and eligibility criteria before the Court.

The Court directed that any content deleted because of fraudulent copyright strikes should be restored if Kumar furnishes Meta with sufficient material showing that the content legitimately belongs to him and that the strikes are fake.

Justice Bhambhani also observed that the issue was arising in several cases involving content creators and required closer scrutiny.

“There are some chinks in the armour, some loopholes that have been noticed. We better sort it out,” the Court said.

The Court added that the problem was leading to increasing litigation.

Hence, the judge issued summons in the suit and notice was issued on Kumar’s interim relief application as well. The matter will be heard next on September 24 along with a connected case raising similar concerns.

Kumar was represented by advocates Himanshu Goyal and Muskaan Garg.

Meta was represented by advocate Amee Rana.