The rise of platforms like Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube has transformed content creation, with short videos, memes, and music-driven clips forming the language of online culture. Yet behind every viral moment lies an often-overlooked legal reality: copyright law. From soundtracks and stitched film scenes to dance challenges and fan pages, digital content routinely reuses protected material, raising difficult questions about legality, licensing, and enforcement.
This piece explores how copyright law applies to digital content made by everyday users, especially in the Pakistani context. It also discusses what we can learn from international case law and platform policies (like TikTok’s music rules or YouTube’s Content ID system) about the risks and responsibilities involved. Most importantly, it reflects on the confusion creators face when it comes to remixing, parodying, or reusing existing work, especially since our local laws don’t always offer clear guidance.
Copyright Law in Pakistan and Beyond
In Pakistan, the protection of copyrights is guaranteed under the Copyright Ordinance, 1962, which grants authors exclusive rights to reproduce, distribute, adapt, and communicate their original works. These rights arise automatically and without a condition of prior registration. Similarly, the doctrine of fair dealing is introduced by Section 57, allowing limited use of copyrighted content for research, private study, criticism, review, and news reporting.
However, the law does not explicitly recognize the central categories of digital culture, such as parody, satire, or transformative use. This results in the uncertainty around the legality of memes, humorous remixes, and fan edits, often requiring courts to interpret fair-dealing provisions broadly or look to foreign jurisprudence.
Internationally, Pakistan is a signatory to the Berne Convention, which obligates member states to provide automatic protection for creative works without formalities. Therefore, if a Pakistani user uploads a reel with a popular Bollywood track or Hollywood scene without licensing, the legal issue isn’t just local. It could, at least in theory, lead to trouble across borders, too.
Fair Dealing, Fair Use, and Comparative Lessons
The doctrine of fair use is treated differently in the United States and some European states. For instance, in Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., it was held by the U.S. Supreme Court that even commercial parodies may qualify as fair use if they are sufficiently transformative. The Court introduced a four-part test that considers purpose, nature, amount used, and market effect.
More recently, it was clarified in the Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith (2023) that mere change of the appearance of a work is not enough; transformative use must offer new meaning or purpose, not just aesthetic variation. Meanwhile, in a key decision, the European Court of Justice ruled in Deckmyn v. Vandersteen that for something to count as a parody, it must clearly reference the original work, stand apart with noticeable differences, and avoid spreading any discriminatory message.
Pakistan lacks equivalent case law. Yet courts have, in selected cases, expressed an inclination to refer to international standards. In the context of user-generated content, this opens the door to potential legal recognition of transformation, though no precedent currently provides certainty.
Platform Licensing and the Music Question
These days, most digital copyright disputes are dealt with by automated enforcement by the platforms. Platforms like Instagram and TikTok make deals with music labels to offer users a built-in library of licensed tracks. As long as creators stick to these pre-approved songs, they’re usually legally safe. However, when people upload outside audio, edit or remix songs, or use music in paid or sponsored posts without getting proper permission, it becomes legally problematic.
Instagram offers a licensed music library, but clips using unauthorized or modified audio may be muted or removed. TikTok operates a two-tier system in which general users can access the standard music library, and brands and influencers are required to use the Commercial Music Library (CML) for monetized posts. In 2024, A breakdown in licensing talks between TikTok and Universal Music Group led to the temporary removal of thousands of popular tracks.
YouTube relies on its Content ID system, which flags and enforces copyright claims automatically. Repeated violations can result in demonetization or account termination. Similarly, Facebook Reels uses Meta’s Rights Manager to scan uploads, offering monetization only for content using approved tracks.
Although copyright enforcement is faster and more consistent with these mechanisms, the process has become more arbitrary, where the content is often removed without warning, sometimes before the creator has a chance to explain how their use might qualify as fair use or fair dealing. Technically, appeals are available; however, they can be slow, unclear, and rarely in favor of the creators.
Recreation vs Replication: The Line Creators Must Watch
One of the most common forms of content on social platforms is the recreation of famous scenes or dances. But legally, the difference between “recreation” and “replication” matters. A user performing a dance routine in their own style with licensed music, adding commentary or satire to a clip, is likely not causing any infringement.
In contrast, reposting a full movie scene or a studio-quality audio track, particularly without alteration or critical purpose, is high-risk. Courts and platforms are more likely to treat such content as infringement, especially if it substitutes for the original or reaches the same audience.
Some users try to avoid platform detection systems by slowing down songs, changing the pitch, or adding filters. These tricks might avoid detection for a while, but they don’t make the use legal. This became clear in the 2024 Believe Music case, where Universal Music Group sued over altered versions of its songs, and the court agreed that changing how a track sounds doesn’t change who owns it.
Compliance Tips for Pakistani Content Creators
For Pakistani creators, especially students and freelancers exploring the global content economy, the legal risks are real but manageable. A few clear practices can help reduce exposure:
- Use platform-licensed music only. Avoid importing external audio unless you hold the rights.
- Transform, don’t copy. Add commentary, humor, or educational value to content that draws on existing works.
- Be mindful of quantity. Even short segments can infringe if they form the “heart” of the original.
- Disclose sponsorships. Commercial use often triggers stricter music licensing requirements.
- Maintain records. Save correspondence, licenses, and fair use rationales for any disputed content.
Even with precautions followed, enforcement is often unpredictable. Content that remains online for months may be removed overnight, not on the grounds of illegality, but because platforms operate on risk-avoidance and automated decision-making. As Pakistani voices grow louder in the global digital landscape, legal literacy must grow with them. Only then can content be both viral and valid.
References
Copyright Ordinance, 1962 (Pakistan), S. 57
Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, Paris Act, 1971. World Intellectual Property Organization.
Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569 (1994).
Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith, 598 U.S.(2023).
Deckmyn v. Vandersteen, C-201/13, EU: C:2014:2132. Court of Justice of the European Union.
TikTok Help Center, Commercial Music Library Policy.
Instagram Help Center, Licensed Music Use on Instagram.
YouTube Help, Copyright Strike Basics.
Meta Newsroom, “Music Revenue Sharing: A New Way for Creators to Earn Money on Facebook,” 25 July 2022. Available at: https://about.fb.com/news/2022/07/music-revenue-sharing-for-video-creators-on-facebook/
Gianluca Lo Nostro & Florence Loève, “France’s Believe faces $500 million copyright dispute with UMG in the U.S.” Reuters via WTVBAM, 5 November 2024. Available at: https://wtvbam.com/2024/11/05/frances-believe-faces-500-million-copyright-dispute-with-umg-in-the-u-s/
