The trending song in a branded reel: What’s the hidden cost?

When a brand reaches out to a creator for a campaign, the brief is usually simple: make something that feels native, feels real, feels like what people already watch. So the creator does what they always do. They open Instagram, pick a song that is trending, shoot the video, and post it. Nobody thinks twice about the music. It is right there in the app. Everyone uses it.

That assumption is now landing brands in court.

The music available on Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube is licensed for personal use only. The moment a creator uses it in content that promotes a brand or a product, it becomes commercial use, and commercial use requires a separate licence that almost nobody in a typical brand-influencer workflow stops to get. Most creators do not know this. Most brand managers do not know this. And music labels, after years of watching it happen at scale, have decided they are done waiting.

What the Industry Is Actually Saying

Gaurav Dagaonkar, co-founder and CEO of Hoopr.ai, which licenses music for brands in India, explains the distinction that most marketing teams are missing. "Brands are not permitted to use popular songs on social media because the content that they create is classified as commercial content," he says. "Most of the songs on social media platforms are only cleared for personal use. Individuals making reels or short format videos are fine, but brands are using popular music to increase the reach of their content, to promote their brand, and to bring down the cost of acquiring customers."

That distinction, between a personal reel and a branded campaign, is exactly what makes the liability real. To use a popular song in branded content legally, a brand needs a licence from the music label and publisher covering the sound recording and the composition, and a separate licence from a Performing Rights Organisation like the IPRS in India. "It is important that they procure a licence from the music label and publisher and also a PRO such as the IPRS," Dagaonkar says. "And that is what we do at Hoopr. We have built India's first and only platform that actually helps brands procure these licences. Many IPL teams and many D2C brands are already legally compliant now."

Dagaonkar also points to something that gets missed in the conversation about legal risk. When a campaign gets taken down because of a copyright issue, the brand loses not just the content but all the momentum and ad spend behind it. "The entire campaign is taken down and the brand loses all the traction that they have got, sometimes the money that they had invested in promoting that campaign," he says. For an influencer, the consequences are just as serious. "It could mean their video being taken down, losing their standing with the brand, and it is also social shaming in a way for a brand to be mentioned like that."

The Cases Piling Up

Music labels in India have been among the most assertive in drawing this line, and Zee Music stands out for the clarity of its position. When Zee Music discovered that brands were using its catalogue in commercial content without authorisation, it did not look the other way. The company sent legal notices to brands including Nykaa, seeking Rs 1.75 crore in damages for using popular songs in Instagram Reels to sell products. 

Read more on Zee suing Nykaa

Zee Entertainment has also taken JioStar to court, claiming the platform used its music catalogue more than 50 times even after their licensing agreement had expired. It is a stance rooted in a straightforward principle: the copyright belongs to the label, and using it to sell someone else's products without permission is not a grey area. As Dagaonkar puts it, "It is refreshing to see labels take a stand like this because it is their copyright that is being infringed."

Sony Music India has filed a Rs 5 crore lawsuit against Myntra for allegedly using 21 copyrighted songs in advertisements without authorisation. Globally, Warner Music Group sued cookie chain Crumbl Cookies over 159 social media videos featuring unlicensed music, seeking up to $23.85 million in statutory damages. Universal Music Group and Concord Music Group jointly sued e-commerce platform Quince, an e-commerce platform, alleging the company and its influencers used over 67 sound recordings and 71 musical compositions in promotional videos without licences, even after receiving formal notices in 2024.

Read more: Zee-Jiostar lawsuit

The most complicated case unfolding right now involves DSW Designer Shoe Warehouse in the United States. Warner Music sued DSW in May 2025 over more than 200 tracks used across TikTok and Instagram by the brand and its influencer partners. Unlike most brands, DSW did not settle. It filed its own lawsuit against Sony, Universal, and BMG, arguing that the platforms encourage users to add music to videos, build libraries that obscure commercial use restrictions in fine print, and then allow labels to sue for the very behaviour the platforms make easy. Sony responded by filing a separate lawsuit in California. Three cases are now running in parallel, and no court has ruled on the merits yet. Whatever is decided will set the terms for how brand-influencer-music liability works going forward.

What the Lawyers Say Brands Must Do Now

Sanjoli Jain, Counsel at Law SB, says the core problem is a misconception baked into how people experience the internet. "The ease of accessibility often creates a misconception that such content is freely available for commercial use, which may inadvertently result in infringement of another entity's intellectual property rights," she says. The outcome of the current cases, she adds, "is likely to set an important precedent for the evolving landscape of digital marketing, influencer collaborations, and online content distribution."

Alay Razvi, Managing Partner at Accord Juris, is more direct about what brands need to do right now. He says it is essential for brands, agencies, and influencers to conduct proper due diligence on the chain of title, the scope of licences, and the permissible usage rights of any work they plan to use commercially. "All entities involved in online content distribution must ensure that if their works incorporate bits of works not owned by them, appropriate licences and permissions are obtained," he says. Beyond that, he recommends that brands build clear intellectual property compliance obligations into influencer and agency agreements before any promotional content goes live. Without that, a brand can be held responsible for a song choice it never even made.

The practical path is to use platform-approved commercial music libraries, subscribe to services licensed explicitly for branded content, or work with a licensing platform to clear specific tracks before a campaign launches. Picking a trending song and hoping nobody notices is no longer a strategy. Labels have automated content monitoring, they are actively looking, and as the cases above show, they are no longer settling for silence.