Two digital creators have moved the Delhi High Court alleging that Meta's 'Edit Post' feature is being misused to backdate Facebook posts, enabling unidentified persons to falsely claim ownership of original content and initiate copyright strikes against genuine creators. According to reports from Bar and Bench and Mint, financial educator Pushkar Raj Thakur and digital creator Neeraj Joshi have filed commercial suits claiming that false copyright strikes have been used to threaten removal of original content and, in some cases, suspension or deletion of creators' Instagram accounts. The petitions allege that unidentified individuals are abusing Meta's copyright reporting mechanism by filing fraudulent ownership claims against original videos. As per Mint, the creators first uploaded original videos on Facebook, Instagram or other Meta-owned platforms, after which the content was allegedly copied and uploaded to Facebook by other users, with the 'Edit Post' feature subsequently used to manipulate the appearance of when the copied post was created, making it appear older than the original upload.
The creators claim that the alleged misuse involves Facebook's 'Edit Post' feature, where unidentified individuals first upload unrelated photos or videos on Facebook. According to Mint, after an original creator publishes a video on Instagram, the material in the older Facebook post is allegedly replaced with the creator's video using the edit function. The suits contend that Facebook continues to display the original publication date of the post despite the edited content, creating the impression that the infringing party uploaded the video before the original creator and enabling them to claim ownership through Meta's Rights Manager. The creators argue that Meta's automated copyright enforcement system acts on such complaints without adequately verifying authorship, metadata, edit history or the actual chronology of publication. As per Mint, the 'Edit Post' feature allows users to modify a post after it has been published, including correcting text, updating captions or adding information, while retaining the post's original publication date, which the creators allege is being manipulated to create misleading evidence in copyright disputes.
In Joshi's case, Justice Jyoti Singh of the Delhi High Court recorded Meta's submission on July 10 that it would investigate the allegations if his account had not already been permanently disabled. According to Mint, the court also directed Meta to preserve Joshi's verified Instagram account and provide Basic Subscriber Information and IP logs within three weeks to help identify those allegedly responsible. The court issued summons in the suit while his plea for interim relief is scheduled to be heard on August 5. For Thakur's case, Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani passed an order on July 1 where Meta assured the court that his videos would not be removed on the basis of copyright strikes until the next hearing and that his account would not be closed because of repeated complaints. The company also agreed to restore the deleted videos after Thakur provides the relevant URLs. As per Mint, Meta was directed to take these steps within three weeks of the July 9 order, with the court stating that 'Defendant No. 2 (Meta) shall carry out necessary investigation into the allegations made in the plaint and also preserve Plaintiff's (Neeraj Joshi) Verified Instagram Account'.
Thakur has sought damages of around ₹2 crore for the alleged loss of followers, monetisation opportunities, sponsorships and commercial goodwill. As reported by Bar and Bench, he has also sought an injunction restraining Meta from acting on allegedly fraudulent copyright claims, along with directions to introduce KYC safeguards, timestamp integrity protections, metadata verification and anti-manipulation measures within Rights Manager. Thakur alleges that dozens of his videos were removed or restricted and claims Meta denied him access to Rights Manager even as the alleged infringers continued to use the same mechanism against him. According to Mint, Thakur's petition also alleges that some individuals impersonated him, sold courses under his name and collected money from his followers, with the petition stating that 'mechanically removes, disables and restricts the Plaintiff's (Pushkar Raj Thakur) original copyrighted works through its automated copyright enforcement systems without meaningful verification of authorship, ownership, metadata, publication chronology or legitimacy of the underlying claims'. Joshi has made similar claims, seeking nearly ₹2 crore in damages from Meta and the alleged infringers.
The petitions highlight growing concerns among digital creators that copyright enforcement systems designed to protect original works can themselves be manipulated to suppress legitimate content. According to Mint, the legal question is whether Meta can be held responsible if its tools and enforcement systems are allegedly used to generate false copyright claims. As per Mint, liability could arise if evidence shows Meta knew about the alleged manipulation, materially contributed to it or continued automated takedowns despite receiving credible notice of misuse. The dispute comes as Meta faces copyright litigation in other markets, with publishers including Elsevier, Cengage Learning, Macmillan Publishing Group and McGraw Hill filing a class-action lawsuit against Meta alleging that the company illegally copied millions of copyrighted books and journal articles from pirate websites to train its AI models without permission or payment. The stakes are rising as India's creator economy expands, with the sector growing nearly 25% to ₹4,500 crore from ₹3,600 crore in 2024 according to the India Influencer Marketing Report 2025 by The Goat Agency and Kantar. Legal experts suggest the high court could require Meta to strengthen technological and procedural safeguards built into its platform.
