INTRODUCTION
In today’s algorithm-driven society, children are no longer just passive consumers of digital content; they are the creators, performers, and brand ambassadors. From unboxing toys to starring in family digital video logs, child influencers are now a dominant force in digital marketing. While this new-age phenomenon offers visibility and income, it simultaneously raises crucial legal questions: Who owns the earnings? Can a minor give valid consent to such exposure? Where does content creation end and exploitation begin? Child influencers and child actors are not directly covered by any specific legal framework, in contrast to traditional child performers in television and film, who are only partially protected by labour laws. However, progressive measures have been implemented in comparable jurisdictions. For example, France amended its labour code in 2020 to include provisions governing online child influencers.[1] It limits working hours, necessitates prior state approval, and guarantees that a sizeable amount of earnings is deposited into a blocked account that won’t be accessible until the child is an adult.
GLOBAL PROTECTION, INTERNATIONAL SAFEGUARDS, POSITION IN INDIA
A California state law known as the Coogan Act safeguards the income of young actors and actresses. Although child influencers are not currently covered by the Coogan Act[2], some politicians are working to either include them in its purview or include them in child labour laws that are specific to social media.[3] The ethics of making children work as social influencers are ambiguous. Additionally, it is illegal worldwide for children under the age of 12 to work in any capacity.[4] Overall, the benefits of child influencing are obvious; they can relate to the target audience, make money, have fun, etc, but it is much less clear how widespread the risks are and how easily children working as child influencers could be exploited. In contrast, India does not have even the most basic safeguards. Even though the Supreme Court established guidelines that put the child’s best interests first in adoption,[5] the doctrine hasn’t been extended to address the online monetisation of children.
This blog explores the legal loopholes surrounding young influencers and an attempt at understanding India’s ability to amalgamate its legal framework that balances child protection with digital opportunity.
WHO ARE CHILD INFLUENCERS? HOW ARE THEY MONETIZED?
Any minor who creates content for digital platforms and new kid-friendly apps is referred to as a child influencer. Usually, they do this in partnership with brands or with parental or guardian guidance. The great majority of children are purposefully promoted by adults for financial gain, though some may naturally become well-known due to their charm or talent. A crucial ethical and legal question is raised by the commodification of a child’s digital identity: Is the child an adult-controlled source of income or a stakeholder? In the case of Ryan Kaji, a young American YouTube content creator who started reviewing toys at the age of three and currently runs a company reportedly valued at over USD 100 million, is a noteworthy example. Although his case has spurred discussions about commercial exploitation in the US, India is still without any legally binding standards about the pay or working conditions of digital child performers.[6]
LEGAL FRAMEWORK
Digital or entertainment labour performed in a home environment in India is not covered by the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act of 1986. Furthermore, minors are not permitted to sign legally binding contracts under the Indian Contract Act of 1872, which raises serious questions regarding the enforceability and legality of brand deals involving minors.[7] In actuality, the people who sign contracts and manage the revenue streams are parents or digital managers. As a result, the child loses autonomy legally and frequently financially. The monetisation of child influencers in India gives rise to a significant issue related to labour law, contractual capacity, parental accountability, and child rights because there are no statutory frameworks or court precedents. These issues require immediate legislative and policy attention as the nation’s digital economy grows.
ISSUES AND CHALLENGES, LOOPHOLES IN JURISPRUDENCE
Even though child influencers are becoming more and more prevalent in India, the legal system has a very limited framework to protect them. Critical issues like consent, working hours, income ownership, and privacy are entirely unaddressed. The Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act 1986 prohibits the engagement of minors in hazardous work, yet it fails to cover the digital performance done from home.[8] Similarly, the Indian Contract Act, 1872, renders minors incapable of entering into legally enforceable contracts, which raises concerns about the validity of endorsement contracts signed on their behalf.[9] However, some recent judicial rulings in India have begun addressing these legal gaps and signalling a shift toward reform. As in the case of Just Rights for Children Alliance, the Apex Court ruled that even mere viewing or downloading of child sexual exploitation and abuse material (CSEAM) constitutes ‘constructive possession’ under section 15 POCSO,2012, read with ss67B and 67A IT Act,2000, thereby closing a jurisprudential loophole previously recognised by the Madras High Court.[10]
INDIAN LEGISLATURE AND SAFETY, NEED FOR STRICT MEASURES
The emerging prevalence of children in digital platforms, particularly on monetised platforms, has sparked global concerns about Consent, Autonomy and emotional safety. A key aspect lies in the fact that young people, particularly under the age of 13, are not meaningfully competent to consent to content creation or data sharing. Indian Law does not require informed consent for digital exposure of children unless the content is overtly sexual or abusive. Even then, section 11 of the POCSO Act criminalises only certain non-physical sexual advances and does not extend to overexposure or emotional exploitation via constant filming or coerced performances.[11] Despite its apparent innocence, ‘child influencing’ can be concerning and is frequently disregarded. Although society and parents may think they are only documenting happy times, it’s crucial to recognise the possible risks associated with sharing these experiences online. Globally, studies by UNICEF and other child rights bodies have shown that excessive public exposure of children online can result in long-term emotional and psychological harm, including identity issues, anxiety, loss of autonomy, and vulnerability to bullying.[12] Research that contributed to discussions about family entrepreneurship and child labour ethics by demonstrating that child content creators in social media does, in fact, function on the back of child labour.[13] To date, child labour has generally been divided into two categories in the literature: extremely unacceptable and acceptable. The former has been extensively codified in laws that forbid the activity and its by-product in most cases. However, the latter has so far been mostly disregarded, covered under the heading of parental responsibility, and looked into only in cases of egregious negligence.[14]
CONCLUSION
Legislators and courts must recognise that when profit is involved, emotional and privacy violations, even in the absence of obvious physical harm, can qualify as abuse. As the vulnerability of child influencers on digital platforms to exploitation is a pressing issue that requires stern action and robust measures to protect child influencers from online exploitation, which involves parents need to educate their children about the risks of online fame.[15] Social media platforms must enforce clear standards to safeguard the rights of child influencers. While governments can enforce laws, set stricter age-appropriate guidelines, monitor content, and penalize platforms or guardians who exploit children online, societies can also play a crucial role by raising awareness by promoting educational campaigns, encouraging responsible content creation, supporting ethical influencers and sharing real stories about the emotional toll on child influencers.
Author(s) Name: Mehjabin Parvish (NEF Law College, Gauhati University)
References:
[1] Mary-AnneDesai, ‘France’s new child labour laws: Is social media influencer a real job?
(FilmDaily, 17 December 2020)< https://filmdaily.co/news/france -laws> accessed 6 July 2025
[2] The California Labour Code, s 1700 et seq
[3] Ratchel Caitlin Abrams, ‘Family Influencing in the Best Interests of the Child’ (2023) 2(2) <https://cjil.uchicago.edu/online-archive/family-influencing-best-interests-child > accessed 6 July 2025
[4] The Minimum Age Convention, 1973
[5] Lakshmi Kant Pandey v Union Of India (1986) 1987(1) SCC 66
[6] Daniel R.Clark and Alisa B.Jno-Charles, ‘The Child Labor in Social Media: Kidfluencers, Ethics of Care, and Exploitation’ (2025) https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-025-05953-7 accessed 13 July 2025
[7] The Indian Contract Act 1872, s 11
[8] Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act 1986, s 3
[9] The Indian Contract Act,1872, s 11
[10] Just Rights for Children Alliance and Others v S. Harish and Others (2024) Criminal Appeal Nos 2161-2162 of 2024 arising out of SLP (Crl) Nos 3665-3666 of 2024 (SC, 23 September 2024)
[11] The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012, s 11
[12] UNICEF, The State of the World’s Children 2017: Children in a Digital world (2017) <https://www.unicef.org/media/48581/file/SOWC_2017_ENG.pdf> accessed 13 July 2025
[13] Daniel R.Clark & Alisa B.Jno-Charles,A.B, ‘The Child Labor in Social Media: Kidfluencers, Ethics of Care, and Exploitation’ (2025) <https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-025-05953-7> accessed 13 July 2025
[14] Ibid
[15] Oliver Huang et al ‘Recommendations to Combat Child Exploitation in Social Media’ (Social Science Research Network, 4 October 2023) <http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4652240> accessed 13 July 2025
