Asian News International (ANI), one of India’s biggest news agencies, is facing serious accusations. Well-known YouTubers, including Mohak Mangal, claim that ANI is wrongly using YouTube’s copyright system to attack independent creators. They say ANI files copyright strikes on their videos and then asks for large amounts of money to remove them.

This issue has sparked a big online debate. People are now questioning what counts as fair use, how copyright laws should be applied to public-interest content, and whether YouTube’s way of handling such disputes is fair.

The allegations

The controversy started when YouTuber Mohak Mangal released a video called Dear ANI on May 26. In the 13-minute video, he accused the news agency ANI of misusing YouTube’s copyright rules. Mohak said ANI sent two copyright strikes to his channel for using very short video clips, one was just 9 seconds and the other 11 seconds long. These clips were from ANI’s footage about the Kolkata rape case and Operation Sindoor.

Mohak further said that the short video clips he used were part of his commentary and analysis, which should be allowed under Indian copyright law (called fair dealing). But what shocked people more was what he said happened next. According to Mangal, people claiming to represent ANI contacted him privately and asked for Rs 45–50 lakh to remove the copyright strikes. They also warned him that if he didn’t pay, he would get a third strike and under YouTube’s three-strike rule, his channel would be deleted.

His video quickly went viral, and other creators began sharing similar stories. YouTuber Rajat Pawar said he also got two copyright strikes from ANI. He claimed they told him he could either pay a fine or buy a yearly license for Rs 18 lakh to get the strikes removed. Like Mangal, he was warned that his channel could be deleted if he didn’t agree.

Other YouTubers also joined

Shortly after Mohak Mangal’s video, popular comedian and YouTuber Thugesh also shared his experience. He said that ANI had issued a copyright strike against him for using just a 2-second video clip. According to Thugesh, ANI representatives later contacted him and demanded Rs 15 lakh to remove the strike. He described the demand as unreasonable, especially since the clip was very short and was used as part of a humorous commentary.

Under Indian law, specifically Section 52 of the Copyright Act, of 1957, certain uses of copyrighted material are allowed and not considered copyright infringement. This includes fair dealing for purposes such as personal use, research, criticism, review, reporting current events, and education. While the law doesn’t allow full reproduction of copyrighted work, using short clips with added commentary, criticism, or for news reporting is usually considered fair. Creators like Mangal, Rajat Pawar, and Thugesh argue that their use of ANI’s footage falls within this legal protection, as their content was transformative and served a public-interest purpose.

What ANI said 

ANI defended itself by saying it owns the full rights to its content and has the legal right to protect it using YouTube’s copyright tools. It called this lawful action, not extortion, and said anyone who disagrees can go to court. ANI’s Editor-in-Chief, Smita Prakash, backed this view in an article titled “Piracy is not free speech.” Meanwhile, news agency PTI assured YouTubers that it supports ethical journalism and fair business practices.