I act for creators, musicians, production houses and brands on content licensing, rights clearance, personality rights, synthetic media and platform disputes. The laws in this area were written before streaming, influencers and AI-generated media, so much of the work applies older copyright and contract rules to new facts. Rights are usually asserted through cease-and-desist letters and platform takedowns rather than lawsuits, which makes the first response decisive.
Creators, musicians, production houses and brands share one problem. The law on creative work was written before streaming platforms, synthetic media, influencers and cross-border licensing became normal. Rights are asserted in cease-and-desist letters, enforced through takedown notices, and litigated under copyright, trade mark, personality-rights and contract principles that do not always fit how work is now made and sold. I act on both sides of that gap: for creators whose work has been taken without consent, and for businesses that need disputes settled without derailing releases, ad campaigns or talent relationships.
The work includes bands and independent artists claiming ownership of their songs, and digital creators whose content was lifted for ad campaigns and brand pages. It also covers celebrities and influencers whose likeness was used without a release, and production houses working through collaboration, licensing and distribution deals. Representation is available before the Supreme Court of India, the Delhi High Court and commercial courts across India, and matters for creators and businesses outside Delhi are handled remotely.
What I Cover
The practice falls into five groups of work:
- Platform disputes: wrongful YouTube takedowns and counter-notices, Content ID fights, and notices and safe-harbour questions under the IT Act.
- Personality rights: use of a person’s voice, image, name or catchphrase in ads, merchandise or AI media without consent.
- Licensing and collaboration: music publishing, sync licences, co-authorship, and ownership fights where there is no split sheet or written deal.
- Counsel to production houses and labels: talent deals, morality clauses, distribution, master rights and commissioning.
- Brand and influencer disputes: campaigns that use an artist’s work without a licence, morality clauses used against influencers, and ASCI complaints.
Digital Rights, Platform Takedowns & Counter-Notifications
Platform takedowns rarely turn on who is right. They turn on whose notice reaches the platform first, whose paperwork is cleaner, and whose response is written to the platform’s internal standard rather than for a judge. Take a creator who has been wrongly struck: a reaction video removed over a few seconds of licensed footage, a cover taken down despite a statutory licence, or a livestream cut because a rival filed a bad-faith claim. The first question is whether to counter-notify, write to the platform’s legal team, or go to court so the platform has judicial cover to restore the content.
Section 52 of the Copyright Act, 1957 sets out fair-dealing exceptions. They are narrower than American fair use but still useful: criticism, review, reporting and personal use remain protected. The safe-harbour rule in Section 79 of the IT Act, read with the 2021 Intermediary Guidelines, requires platforms to act on valid notices, but also expects them not to act arbitrarily. Where a notice is plainly defective (the wrong owner, no real ownership claim, a takedown used against a competitor), platforms do restore content, but on paperwork, not outrage. I draft the counter-notifications, platform escalations and injunction petitions that supply that paperwork.
Personality Rights, Voice, Image, and Likeness
Indian courts have built a working doctrine of personality and publicity rights from three sources: the right to privacy under Article 21, the passing-off action in trade mark law, and the tort of misappropriation. The Supreme Court’s reasoning on informational privacy in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, the Delhi High Court’s injunctions in cases involving actors and public figures, and earlier High Court decisions together give artists, actors, athletes and public figures real remedies against unauthorised commercial use.
I handle injunction proceedings against unauthorised merchandise and AI deepfakes of a person’s voice or image. The same goes for brand campaigns that use a celebrity’s likeness without a release, and morphed content meant to trade on someone’s fame. On the defence side, I act for brands, agencies and creators accused of misusing a likeness. The defence is usually that the claim is overbroad, that a release or licence covers the use, or that the use is satire, commentary or genuine news.
Content Licensing, Joint Authorship & Collaboration Disputes
Most disputes between collaborators start when a song, script, series or idea turns out to be valuable. Under Section 2(z) of the Copyright Act, a work of joint authorship is one made by two or more authors whose contributions cannot be told apart. Section 17 decides ownership, including for work made in employment or on commission. Where there is no written agreement, the law’s default rules rarely match what the parties thought they had agreed, and that gap is where litigation begins.
I advise musicians, writers and creative teams on asserting or defending ownership where split sheets, work-for-hire terms or assignment deeds are missing, incomplete or contradicted by conduct. That includes exits from bands, collectives and production partnerships, recovering masters and publishing rights, and enforcing or renegotiating royalties. For continuing relationships, I draft and negotiate the agreements that prevent these disputes: split sheets, co-writer agreements, producer points, and assignment and licence terms.
Production Houses, Independent Labels & Commissioning
Production houses, OTT studios and independent labels need continuing legal support, not one-off litigation. Talent agreements, commissioning documents, music clearances, location releases, morality clauses, option agreements and distribution deals should be drafted to hold up in a dispute, not just signed because the shoot starts on Monday. I offer fractional or matter-by-matter counsel to production houses and labels, combining drafting with readiness for disputes.
Typical disputes are breach of exclusivity, overlapping commissions, unpaid sync fees and unauthorised use of commissioned work. Others are fights over derivative rights: sequels, spin-offs and formats. Where the contract is unclear, or a party relied on past dealings instead of the contract, I prepare the case to win early settlement leverage where possible, rather than to fight a long suit.
Influencer, Morality-Clause & Brand-Campaign Disputes
Influencer and brand relationships have grown faster than the contracts behind them. Morality clauses are often invoked, sometimes properly and often opportunistically, to end campaigns, hold back payment or claw back fees after a reputational incident. ASCI’s guidelines on influencer disclosure, first issued in 2021 and updated since, add a regulatory layer on top of the contract. I act for influencers and creators whose contracts have been ended, whose fees have been withheld or who face ASCI complaints, and for brands enforcing a morality clause or recovering fees.
A separate stream of work involves brands using independent artists’ music or visual work in advertising without a licence. It is usually resolved through a targeted cease-and-desist, platform action and, where needed, injunction proceedings in the Delhi High Court or the commercial court with jurisdiction over the brand. The strategic question is whether to ask for damages, a commercial settlement, a public acknowledgment or an injunction, and the answer depends on what the artist wants, not on the loudest posture.
How Matters Are Handled
Media and entertainment matters move faster than most civil work. Platform windows for counter-notifications are measured in days. An ad campaign misusing a creator’s work has a planned run, so every week of delay is a permanent loss. A morality-clause termination, on either side, is harder to undo once it is public. I work to that pace: quick triage, a standing relationship with litigation counsel in other cities for filings outside Delhi, and a preference for saving the commercial relationship where that is still possible, without giving up the legal position.
Engagements usually begin with a paid strategy consultation. It covers the dispute, the evidence, how strong the ownership or defence claims are, and the realistic remedies: takedown, damages, injunction, negotiation, or a mix. If the matter cannot wait, such as a takedown under way, a live ad campaign or a morality-clause termination in progress, I offer faster scheduling. Mark the inquiry as urgent on the contact form; the response target is 24 hours on business days.
Facing a platform takedown, creator dispute, or misuse of your work?
For platform-emergency matters, flag the inquiry as time-sensitive when writing in — response target of 24 hours on business days. You can also complete a structured preliminary case assessment online — it captures the situation, platform, urgency, and evidence in a few minutes.
Frequently asked questions about media and entertainment law
What kinds of media and entertainment law matters do I handle?
Disputes over content licensing, talent contracts, production agreements, defamation, and image and personality rights. Also free speech and certification challenges, and disputes between creators and platforms, broadcasters or production houses. The work covers both advice before publication and contested litigation before civil courts, the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court of India.
Can a film, song, or production be restrained from release through court action?
Yes, but only in limited cases: clear evidence of copyright infringement, defamation, breach of contract, or a breach of personality or privacy rights. Courts are wary of stopping a release because of free speech, and the bar is high. The application is usually moved urgently, supported by the agreements and evidence.
What are personality rights and when do they apply?
They protect against unauthorised commercial use of a person’s name, image, likeness, voice or identity. Indian courts have recognised them, especially for public figures, and have granted injunctions against unauthorised endorsements, AI impersonation and morphed content. Recent decisions have extended them to voice and AI imitation.
How are content licensing and talent contract disputes resolved?
Most licensing and talent contracts contain an arbitration clause and a choice of forum, which usually govern. Where the contract is silent, the civil courts have jurisdiction. The key question is often interim relief (an injunction against use, an account of profits or specific performance) while the arbitration or suit is pending.
Do I represent only creators, or also production houses and broadcasters?
Both, depending on the matter. The work has included enforcement for creators against unauthorised use, and defence for production houses and broadcasters in defamation, certification and contract disputes. Conflicts are checked at the start of every engagement.