Public Broadcasting, Influencers and Copyright: The India in Motion Question

When YouTuber Mohak Mangal was questioned earlier this year for using a short clip from an ANI news broadcast, the message from India’s copyright enforcement system was unambiguous: even a few seconds of unauthorised use can invite serious consequences. ANI reportedly sought ?2.10 crore in compensation, underlining that copyright compliance remains non-negotiable even in the creator economy.Against this backdrop, later developments involving Prasar Bharati and Doordarshan have drawn closer scrutiny. According to media reports, in March 2024, DD National aired India in Motion, a documentary series highlighting government infrastructure initiatives and hosted by travel influencer Kamiya Jani. Within hours of broadcast, full episodes of the taxpayer-funded series appeared on private digital platforms, most prominently on Curly Tales’ YouTube channel, which has over 4.6 million subscribers.

Unlike cases involving short excerpts or fair-use debates, this instance reportedly involved entire episodes being uploaded to a monetisable private platform as part of paid promotional activity. The contrast has raised eyebrows: while an individual creator faced action for limited usage, publicly funded content was widely redistributed online without immediate visible enforcement.Prasar Bharati’s own commissioning and copyright rules lay down clear boundaries. Content commissioned by the public broadcaster typically vests copyright with Prasar Bharati, unless specific written licensing approvals are granted. Producers are barred from sub-assigning work or enabling third-party digital distribution without explicit clearance and documentation. Media reports suggest that these procedures were not fully completed before India in Motion appeared on private platforms.

The project’s execution further complicates the picture. As reported by Newslaundry, the ?6.09 crore work order for India in Motion was awarded to Softline Studio Services Limited through a formal process. However, production and distribution involved entities linked to Fork Media Group, which operates Curly Tales and Mashable India and is led by Sammar Verma, Kamiya Jani’s spouse. Fork Media’s subsequent distribution of the content has brought renewed focus on how public service broadcasting intersects with influencer-led media businesses.The episode highlights broader regulatory challenges. Public broadcasters are increasingly collaborating with digital creators to remain relevant and reach younger audiences. Influencers, however, operate in ecosystems driven by reach, monetisation, and platform ownership. When a presenter of a government-funded programme is also connected to its private digital distribution, questions around transparency and potential conflicts of interest naturally arise.

Another point of debate has been the timing of compliance measures. Reports indicate that key documents such as indemnity bonds, agreements, and completion certificates were finalised months after the programme had already aired and circulated online. Instead of prompt enforcement, the matter reportedly concluded through a settlement, adding to the discussion.At a time when individual creators can face penalties for minor infractions, the Curly Tales–Doordarshan episode raises a larger question for India’s media ecosystem: are influencer networks and public institutions being held to the same copyright standards, or does the framework need clearer rules for a rapidly evolving digital landscape?