Unauthorised Use of Match Highlights on Social Media: Copyright Challenges and Fair Dealing in Sports Broadcasting

Introduction

Sports is not left behind in the intellectual property law, especially in the digital age where sporting content can be consumed, shared, and discussed like any other form of content in a digital environment. The emergence of social media as a communication tool, including Instagram and Youtube, has altered the way broadcasters deliver sporting events in that fans can upload and share the highlights of matches in real-time to the rest of the world. What was once an event during a match that was still within licensed television broadcast now can be edited and can be viewed millions of times in a few minutes, which has brought forth significant copyright questions among broadcasting houses who pay huge sums to have exclusive rights to media content.

At the centre of this shift is a recurrent legal issue; when does a user uploading a part of a live sporting event commit copyright infringement or can it be considered fair dealing under the copyright law?

Today sports broadcasting rights can be considered one of the most valuable commercial resources in the sporting industry. The broadcasters invest heavily to acquire the exclusive rights, live feeds and delivery of sporting content on both television and internet platforms. But social media, including Instagram and YouTube, have enabled viewers to capture and share match highlights virtually immediately, in many cases without permission. To the rights holders, this poses an issue to loss of exclusivity, revenue, and control of the broadcasts made under protection. To the users, however, it has become a common aspect of sports culture and fan interaction to be able to share clips.

As an athlete and a strong sports fan, this issue feels specifically relevant as digital sharing defines the way people follow and communicate about sport on a daily basis. This article thus looks at the response of copyright law to unauthorized match highlights on the internet and whether fair dealing under the Indian laws can be used to provide a valid defence to such instances.

Legal Framework of Intellectual Property Rights in Sports Broadcasting

The problem of marketing and broadcasting arose as the number of sports businesses increased in India. The rights in sports broadcasting or screening are very important. The Copyright Act, 1957 identifies that there are special rights as far as broadcasting is concerned. It is not possible to broadcast or transmit copyrighted and licensed professional tournaments and sporting events without permission by a league or business. It is at the discretion of the broadcasting corporations to re-air and re-telecast the materials.

Section-37 of The Copyright Act, 1957 gives the right of broadcast reproduction of their broadcast to the broadcasters that cover a period of 25 years. Simply put, this can be explained as the fact that even though a sporting event in itself might not be regarded as a protected copyright work, the real broadcast of the event with camera angles, commentaries, replays, and graphics is copyrighted. For example, when a viewer captures a goal in the final minute of a world cup and uploads it to Instagram immediately after it happens, such a clip can infringe on the exclusive rights of the broadcaster.

Section-51 explicitly explains how a broadcast can be considered an infringement when any individual, without the right, reproduces or transmits to others the contents of any protection to the audience in a way that is not allowed by the owner of the right. This is particularly applicable to the example of social media - since a clip of a live game recorded and uploaded online can be easily made accessible to thousands, or even millions, of viewers almost immediately. As much as such sharing can be considered as light interaction with fans, Section-51 brings up the legal aspect of whether that online distribution falls under illegal exploitation of secured broadcast content or not.

Fair Dealing under the Copyright Act, 1957- Does Posting Match Highlights on Social Media Count as Infringement?

In The Copyright Act, 1957, Section 52(1)(a) is a significant exception to infringement of copyright by permitting fair dealing with a copyrighted work out of the reasons like personal use, criticism, review as well as reporting of on-going events. This is to imply that not all the uses of copyrighted material necessarily qualify to be illegal, some limited uses are allowed when the intention is reasonable and does not unduly infringe the rights of the copyright holder. This is applicable in the sports broadcasting where the match footage or sports clips are discussed, analysed or reported as the news, as opposed to mere reproduction An effective judicial definition of fair dealing would be found in the case of India TV Independent News Service Pvt Ltd v Yashraj Films Pvt Ltd in which the court decided to use the four-factor test which is widely used in the United States to ascertain whether a given use was fair dealing. The reason and the character of the use is the first factor, particularly, is the commercial use or is the use really informative. The second criterion is the type of the copyrighted work i.e., whether the original material is highly innovative or it is predominantly factual. The third factor is the magnitude and significance of the copied part against the whole work. The fourth is the impact of such use on the possible market or value of the original work.

This framework is especially helpful when attempting to analyse old sports clips. When an archival clip is uploaded to be discussed about history, compared with a player, or even to analyse a sports event, then a stronger case can be made that fair dealing is being exercised since an extra purpose is being instigated by the use of the clip. Nevertheless, when the clip is uploaded in a manner that replaces official archival material or otherwise impacts the commercial control of the broadcaster the use can drift to infringement. Practically, fair dealing of sports contents is not based on the age of the clip but rather the manner and purpose of use.

When the Content May be Copyright Infringement

Sports clips uploads have a higher likelihood of passing into infringement of copyright if the clip presents the reproduction of a safeguarded broadcast footage without any other motive to make it fall under the fair dealing. Sports broadcasts enjoy legal protection since the broadcast has creative and technical aspects like camera work, commentary, graphics, and replay production, and all these require a lot of talent and investment. Owing to this, the broadcasters gain the right of exclusive telecasting of such footage and the remaining control over the reproduction or communication of such recording.

This is applied in the case where a user posts a clip that he or she did directly in a live match without any commentary, criticism, or analysis. The clip in this case is not being used to talk about the event so is just duplicating part of the protected broadcast. A brief clip of a wicket, a goal or a winning highlight posted as it appears on the television will therefore disrupt the exclusive rights of the broadcaster since it will spread licensed broadcast material outside the licensed platform.

Courts have severally entertained the notion that the rights to broadcast sports events have high commercial value since broadcasters bid high prices in obtaining exclusive rights to telecast. Consequently, even brief unlicensed videos can influence such commercial exclusivity in case they start to replace official match videos. However, in practice, where the upload is not offered with any new value but only allows secured recordings to be shared with people, the risk of infringement would be significantly more powerful according to copyright legislation.

When Uploading Clips May be Legal

There is still a possibility of a legal justification of uploading sports clips in case the clip is brief, and it serves a purpose beyond mere reproduction of the broadcast. Section 52 (1) (a) of The Copyrights Act, 1957, safeguards fair dealing in the case of using such material in connection to criticism or review and this is particularly important in relation to sports footage that has been archived. It would be difficult to take into consideration sports clips uploaded on social media as personal usage since, after they are uploaded, they are publicly available. On the same note, where the clip is referring to the recording that was done in the past, the exception of covering the present events becomes less relevant. The more pertinent legal issue then is whether these kinds of uploads can qualify as criticism or a review.

A brief clip might be more justifiable in situations when it is supplemented by analysis, commentary or discussion that provides the clip with a new purpose. As an illustration, uploading an ancient clip to describe why a certain umpiring decision is controversial, comparing an athlete technique, or talking about a turning point in a historical game, the clip is being utilized to indicate a bigger analytical point than an out-and-out re-publication of broadcast material. The footage in these situations will be included in the conversation, but not the whole subject of watching.

The case of Super Cassettes Industries Ltd v Hamar Television Network Pvt Ltd justifies this practice by noting that liberal way of thinking must be taken by the court during the process of establishing what is covered by criticism, review or reporting. The court pointed out that fair dealing cannot be understood in a confined manner in situations where the copyrighted content is employed to build a discussion or analyze. Using that argument in the context of sports content, a brief archival clip utilized in the explanation or judging of a sporting event might be given greater protection than a clip uploaded with no contextual information. In the real world, the legality is determined by the fact that the clip should add something to the discussion, as opposed to merely releasing the original footage once again.

Analysis

As a sportsperson and a passionate football enthusiast, I believe I find short clips of football playing helpful when it comes to knowing more about the game in addition to the final result. One or two seconds of pressing action, defensive failure, or combination of passes can reveal why this or that goal has occurred much better than analysis. As a player, these clips come in handy when analyzing positioning, decision-making as well as match awareness. Simultaneously, I do not believe that all of the clips must be automatically regarded as infringement, particularly when they are provided in order to be analyzed or discussed in a real sense. But even in the cases when clips are uploaded with the sole purpose of reproducing official highlights without introducing some new end other than that, the right of broadcasters should not be disregarded.

Recommendations

A more moderate approach to copyright is particularly desired with regard to the archival sport footage. As observed in the debate on the topic of archival content of the cricket sport, the rigid application of copyright often consists of deleting old content where fans are having the opportunity to revisit the past through the old clips. The case of Rob Moody illustrates how fan-collected videos can save the history of sports and provide less popular matches to younger viewers. His videos gained popularity due to the fact that they provided historical moments of cricket which would have otherwise been hard to find. The same flexibility in other sports will assist in saving historic games, moments of tactics and legendary performances. Even old clips that are not likely to have much commercial value still tend to increase fan attention, historical consciousness and long-term interest in the sport.

Conclusion

The problem of illegal match highlights on social media demonstrate how the copyright law is attempting to evolve with the current method of consumption of sport in the digital era. The broadcasters still invest a lot of money in obtaining exclusive rights, and this is the reason why legal protection is needed, especially in the cases when the match footage is reproduced without authorization. Simultaneously, social media has become a part of sporting culture where the fans engage in sharing moments, comments, and returning to significant events through brief clips. This complicates the treatment of each upload. Practically, the only distinction is that the clip is being shared as merely an alternative to official content or whether it has an added level of intent like a discussion, review or analysis. One way forward would be to permit non-commercial use of clips, while continuing to protect content that will directly have an impact on broadcasters’ commercial rights. This kind of balance would be more accurate in terms of legal interests and contemporary fan involvement.

Author: Rida Fathima, in case of any queries please contact/write back to us via email to chhavi@khuranaandkhurana.com or at  Khurana & Khurana, Advocates and IP Attorney.

References

1. Naman Khanna, Copyright Law and Sports – An Interconnection from Broadcasting Live Sporting Events to Signature Sports Moves, Global Sports Policy Review, https://www.cnlu.ac.in/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Copyright-Law-and-Sports-An-Interconnection-from-Broadcasting-Live-Sporting-Events-to-Signature-Sports-Moves-by-Naman-Khanna.pd.

2. Sidharth Monga, Why cricket boards should be more liberal with archival footage, ESPN CricInfo, (June 19, 2020),   https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/why-cricket-boards-should-be-more-liberal-with-archival-footage-1225288.

3. Nikhil Purohit, When Cricket Meets Copyright: Does Upload of Sports Clips on Social Media Amount to ‘Fair Dealing’?, SpicyIP, (June 30, 2020),  https://spicyip.com/2020/06/when-cricket-meets-copyright-does-upload-of-sports-clips-on-social-media-amount-to-fair-dealing.html.

4. Manupatra, Intellectual Property Rights in Sports Broadcasting, Manupatra Articles, https://articles.manupatra.com/article-details/Intellectual-Property-Rights-in-Sports-Broadcasting.

5. Supremo Amicus, Sports Broadcasting Law: Evolution and the Road Ahead, Supremo Amicus,  https://supremoamicus.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/A29.v16.pdf.