The Content Strike Crisis: YouTube’s War on Indian Creator

In recent times, an atmosphere of fear has gripped YouTube content creators across India, particularly those producing news, education, reaction, or infotainment videos. The platform’s stringent copyright policies, coupled with a vague understanding of "fair use" in the Indian legal system, have led to a wave of content strikes that threaten the very existence of independent creators. From established names like Mohak Mangal, Punya Prasoon, Paurush, and Thag
esh Being Honest to smaller channels, no one seems immune. Channels, some as old as seven years with millions of subscribers and hundreds of videos, risk being wiped out in just seven days due to a single strike. This isn’t a surgical strike—it’s a content strike, and it’s shaking the foundation of India’s independent media.

The Root of the Problem: YouTube’s Three-Strike Rule

The core issue lies in YouTube’s US-centric three-strike policy, which allows a channel to be terminated after three copyright strikes within 90 days. While designed to combat blatant copyright theft—like uploading entire movies or music tracks—this policy is being weaponized in India against creators using mere seconds of content under what should qualify as fair use. For example, a 4-second news clip in a 20-minute video can trigger a strike, potentially leading to channel deletion or demands for exorbitant payments to resolve the issue.

Unlike in the US, where fair use is clearly defined under Section 107 of the Copyright Act, covering criticism, commentary, news reporting, and education, India’s copyright laws lag behind. The concept of fair use is loosely addressed under Section 52 of the Copyright Act, 1957, but lacks clarity, especially for digital content. This ambiguity allows news agencies and individuals to exploit YouTube’s automated system, issuing strikes for minimal content usage that would be protected in other jurisdictions.

The Impact on Creators

The consequences are dire. Creators are caught in a bind: pay hefty fines to news agencies for using short clips or risk losing their channels. Many, unaware of the legal intricacies, face strikes for content they believed was covered under fair use. For instance, during the Sushant Singh Rajput case, media outlets used Rhea Chakraborty’s Instagram photos without permission, citing public interest—a classic fair use scenario. Yet, when YouTubers use similar logic, they face crippling strikes.

Established channels like NewsLaundry have faced this firsthand. In 2021, the India Today Group issued over 50 copyright strikes against NewsLaundry for using short clips to critique their coverage. Without clear fair use protections, NewsLaundry was off-air for over two months, surviving only due to robust legal support. Individual creators, however, often lack such resources, forcing them to either comply with financial demands or abandon their channels.

The Misleading Narrative

Social media has fueled a narrative pitting YouTubers against specific news agencies, suggesting a single entity is targeting creators. This oversimplification distracts from the real issue: YouTube’s flawed policy and India’s outdated copyright framework. While some agencies may exploit the system, the problem is systemic. If one agency weaponizes strikes today, others will follow tomorrow. The focus should be on reforming the system, not vilifying individuals.

Fair Use Around the World vs. India

In the US, fair use is a cornerstone of creative expression. Late-night shows like those hosted by Jimmy Kimmel or Stephen Colbert routinely use news clips for satire, protected by law. In the UK, the Doctrine of Fair Dealing under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 allows limited use of copyrighted material for research, criticism, review, or news reporting. In India, however, the lack of clear guidelines leaves creators vulnerable. A 10-second clip of a politician’s speech or a news anchor’s rant can lead to a strike, even if used for commentary or public interest.

The Role of Government and Public Broadcasters

A silver lining has emerged with the Indian government’s recent announcement that content from public broadcasters like Prasar Bharati, Doordarshan, and All India Radio will be free for social media use. This move came after reports of taxpayer-funded agencies issuing strikes against creators. However, the implementation remains uncertain. Will parliamentary proceedings or public interest content be truly strike-free? Only time will tell.

Still, relying solely on government content isn’t a solution. Private news agencies have a right to monetize their content, but demanding lakhs for a 10-second clip in a 20-minute video is disproportionate. A balanced approach, where fair use is clearly defined and copyright claims (which redirect revenue to the original owner) are prioritized over strikes, is essential.

YouTube’s Role and Responsibility

YouTube’s hands-off approach exacerbates the crisis. The platform’s automated systems favor copyright holders, instantly flagging content and issuing strikes without thorough review. Unlike copyright claims, which redirect revenue without penalizing creators, strikes threaten channel termination. YouTube’s policies, designed for the US market, fail to account for India’s unique legal and cultural context, where 500 million users—double the US audience—make it the platform’s largest market.

YouTube maintains separate trending lists for Indian languages like Hindi, Tamil, and Telugu, proving it can tailor policies to local needs. Why not adapt copyright rules? For instance, YouTube could limit strikes to egregious violations, issue warnings for minor infractions, or redirect revenue to copyright holders instead of deleting channels. Such changes would protect creators while respecting intellectual property.

What Can Be Done?

The fight for fair use requires collective action:

1. Creators: Unite across genres—news, entertainment, left, or right—to advocate for policy reform. Collaborate with legal experts to challenge strikes in court and push for clearer fair use laws.
2. Audience: Support creators by emailing YouTube at in@youtube.com to demand policy changes. File complaints at pgportal.gov.in or write to supremecourt@nic.in, urging the government and judiciary to define fair use. Share and download videos to amplify creators’ voices.
3. Government and Judiciary: The Supreme Court must clarify fair use in the digital age, ensuring news and commentary remain protected. The government should enforce its promise of free access to public broadcaster content.
4. YouTube: Revise the three-strike policy for India, prioritizing claims over strikes and issuing warnings for minor violations. Recognize India’s market size and legal nuances.

Independent YouTubers are a pillar of India’s media landscape, offering diverse perspectives free from corporate or government control. Without reform, this last bastion of independent news risks extinction. As viewers, your support is critical. Share this post, download videos, and join the fight to protect creators. If fair use isn’t clarified, the mother of democracy risks losing her voice.

For creators like Deshbhakt, the battle is personal. We’re consulting lawyers, building financial buffers, and preparing for legal fights to defend fair use—a fundamental right. Whether through subscriptions, shares, or advocacy, your support can ensure independent voices survive.

Let’s not let a flawed policy silence India’s storytellers. Act now, or the content you love may vanish forever.