Podcast Youtube Ownership Dispute Demand Letters

Scenario: One co-creator locks other out of accounts after falling-out

Example: Alex and Jordan co-host podcast “The Daily Deep Dive.” Alex registered podcast hosting account, YouTube channel, and social media in Alex’s personal name. After disagreement, Alex changes passwords, locks Jordan out, continues producing show solo.

Jordan’s claims:

• Partnership dissolution: We were partners; you can’t unilaterally keep partnership assets
• Joint authorship: I co-created episodes; I own copyright too; you can’t use episodes without my consent
• Conversion: You took joint property (revenue, access) for yourself exclusively
• Breach of fiduciary duty: As partner, you owed me loyalty; locking me out and keeping revenue is breach

Alex’s defenses:

• Account ownership: I registered all accounts in my name; I own them per platform ToS
• No partnership: You were contributor/guest, not partner; no profit-sharing agreement existed
• Individual copyright: I wrote scripts and produced; your contribution was minimal/not copyrightable

Resolution paths:

1. Restore access + negotiate buyout: Jordan regains access; parties negotiate Jordan’s exit and buyout of interest
2. Immediate injunction: Jordan files for emergency court order requiring Alex to restore access and preserve revenue pending resolution
3. Revenue accounting + damages: Alex keeps control but pays Jordan share of revenue earned during dispute
4. Forced dissolution: Court orders show shut down or sold, proceeds split

Scenario: One co-creator receives all platform revenue, doesn’t share with other

Example: Taylor and Sam co-host YouTube channel. Taylor controls AdSense account; receives all ad revenue ($10k/month). Taylor claims Sam only deserves payment for “time spent” (3 hours/week × $50/hr = $600/month), not 50% profit share.

Sam’s claims:

• Partnership accounting: We’re partners; entitled to 50% of profits (absent agreement specifying different split)
• Breach of contract: We agreed to split revenue equally (prove via texts, emails, verbal agreement)
• Unjust enrichment: Taylor unjustly enriched by keeping revenue from jointly-created content

Taylor’s defenses:

• No agreement to split: Never agreed to 50/50; Sam was compensated guest/contractor
• Unequal contribution: I do 90% of work (editing, production, sponsorships); Sam just shows up to record
• I own channel: I created channel, built audience, control monetization; Sam contributed later

Resolution:

• If partnership proven: Taylor must account for all revenue and pay Sam’s share (likely 50/50 default)
• If no partnership: Sam may still recover under unjust enrichment or quantum meruit (reasonable value of services)
• Going forward: Formalize split (could be 50/50, 60/40, or other based on contributions)

Scenario: One co-creator wants out; other won’t buy them out or disputes valuation

Example: Casey and Morgan co-created podcast. Casey wants to leave and demands buyout of $100k (50% of what Casey values show at). Morgan offers $10k. Stalemate.

Casey’s position:

• Show generates $15k/month; worth $300k (20× monthly revenue industry standard); my 50% = $150k; willing to accept $100k
• I built audience, negotiated major sponsors; deserve fair buyout
• If you won’t buy me out, sell the show and split proceeds

Morgan’s position:

• You want to leave; not my problem; find your own buyer for your share
• Show value speculative; most of value is my personal brand, not the “show” itself
• I’ll give you $10k and full release to leave quietly; otherwise you get nothing

Resolution options:

1. Forced buyout: Court-ordered appraisal + one party must buy other out at appraised value
2. Shotgun clause (if in agreement): One party names price; other must buy or sell at that price
3. Liquidation: Shut down show, sell assets (channel, back catalog, social accounts), split proceeds
4. Deadlock dissolution: Court dissolves partnership, appoints receiver to liquidate assets
5. Competing shows: Both parties leave, each starts new show (if no non-compete), show shuts down

Scenario: After split, one party continues using show name or IP the other claims to own

Example: Chris and Pat co-created “Tech Talk Daily” podcast. They split up. Chris continues producing “Tech Talk Daily” solo. Pat demands Chris stop using the name.

Pat’s claims:

• Trademark infringement: I co-own “Tech Talk Daily” name; you can’t use without my consent
• Unfair competition: Consumers confused into thinking your solo show is our original joint show
• Breach of partnership: Show name is partnership asset; you can’t take for yourself

Chris’s defenses:

• I registered trademark: I filed trademark in my name; I own it
• I created the name: I came up with name before you joined; you contributed nothing to brand
• You abandoned interest: You left; I’m keeping show going; you can’t stop me now

Resolution:

• If joint ownership of name/trademark: Neither can use without other’s consent OR court orders co-exclusive use (both can use) OR one buys out other’s interest in name
• If one party has superior trademark rights: That party can enjoin other from using name
• Common settlement: Departing party gets paid transition period (6-12 months) while continuing party phases out their involvement; continuing party keeps name

Scenario: After split, dispute over who owns old episodes and can monetize them

Example: Drew and Riley created 200 podcast episodes together over 3 years. They split. Drew (who controls hosting account) keeps all 200 episodes live, earning $3k/month from ads. Riley demands episodes be taken down or revenue shared.

Riley’s claims:

• Joint authorship: I co-created all episodes; I own copyright; you need my consent to continue distributing
• Right of publicity: My voice/likeness in episodes; you can’t use commercially without my consent
• Partnership assets: Back catalog is partnership asset; you can’t monetize for yourself post-dissolution

Drew’s defenses:

• Joint authorship = joint rights: As joint author, I can license/exploit work without your consent (subject to accounting to you for profits)
• Implied license: We both intended episodes to be publicly distributed; you granted implied license
• Estoppel: You participated in creating and distributing episodes for years; can’t object now

Resolution:

• Continue distribution, split revenue: Episodes stay live; Drew pays Riley 50% of ad revenue from old episodes
• Buyout of back catalog: Drew pays Riley lump sum for Riley’s interest in old episodes; Drew keeps 100% going forward
• Take down old episodes: Remove from all platforms to avoid ongoing dispute (lose revenue but clean break)
• Archive episodes (no monetization): Episodes stay available but ads/monetization removed

If no written agreement specifies revenue split, courts consider:

Contribution-based split arguments:

• Claiming larger share: “I do 70% of work (editing, production, booking guests, social media); partner just shows up to record; I deserve 70% of revenue”
• Defense: “Partnership default is equal split regardless of who does more work; if you wanted different split, should have documented it; my on-air talent is what drives audience”
• Court analysis: Difficult to prove unequal split without written agreement; equal presumption strong; but if contribution disparity extreme (e.g., 95/5), court may adjust

Common valuation methods:

Example valuations:

For departing co-creator (seeking maximum buyout):

• Hire appraiser: Get professional valuation to anchor negotiation high
• Emphasize your contribution: Document your role in building audience, landing sponsors, creating content
• Threaten alternatives: “If you won’t buy me out, I’ll compete with you (launch rival show) or force sale of entire show”
• Highlight growth trajectory: Show revenue increasing, use future projections to justify higher multiple
• Lock up leverage: If you control accounts/access, don’t give up until paid

For continuing co-creator (minimizing buyout cost):

• Challenge value: “Revenue declining; sponsors leaving; audience loyalty is to ME not the show”
• Emphasize your contribution: “You’re leaving because I do all the work; show won’t exist without me”
• Offer earn-out: “I’ll pay you percentage of revenue for next 12 months instead of lump sum (reduces risk for me)”
• Highlight risks: “Show could fail without you; I’m taking all the risk continuing; discount justified”
• Lowball + walk away alternative: “Take $X or get nothing; I’ll rebrand and start over”

Scenario 1: Equal partners, amicable split

Scenario 2: Unequal partners, hostile split

Scenario 3: Deadlock, forced sale

Best practices for co-creators:

1. Multi-admin access: Both co-creators have admin/owner access to ALL accounts from day one (YouTube channel managers, podcast hosting logins, social media business accounts)
2. Separate business entity: Create LLC; register all accounts under LLC email (not personal); both co-creators are LLC managers with access to LLC email
3. Shared password manager: Store all passwords in shared 1Password/LastPass vault accessible to both parties
4. Written agreement specifying access: “Both parties shall at all times maintain full administrative access to all Platform accounts. Neither party may remove other party’s access without 30 days notice.”
5. Regular access audits: Monthly check that both parties still have access; if one discovers they’ve been removed, immediate red flag
6. Platform account transfers in writing: If one party holds primary account, written agreement: “Primary account holder acknowledges they hold account in trust for partnership and will not revoke co-creator’s access or transfer account without consent”

Immediate steps if locked out:

1. Document the lockout: Screenshot attempts to log in; record exact date/time you discovered lockout; save any communications from co-creator about it
2. Demand restoration (email + certified mail): “You have locked me out of [accounts]. This violates my partnership rights. Restore my access within 48 hours or I will seek emergency court relief.”
3. Platform support (low success but try): • YouTube: Report via TeamYouTube Twitter or support form; explain ownership dispute • Google: Submit account recovery request citing ownership dispute • Podcast hosts: Contact support with proof of ownership interest • Instagram/Facebook: Report hacked account (may work if you previously had access) • Most platforms won’t intervene without court order
4. Emergency court relief (TRO/preliminary injunction): • File motion for temporary restraining order requiring co-creator to restore access • Argue immediate irreparable harm (losing revenue, audience, can’t operate business) • Request court order compelling disclosure of passwords • If granted, co-creator must comply or face contempt
5. Appointment of receiver: Request court appoint neutral third party to take control of accounts pending resolution of dispute
6. DMCA counter-strategy: If you’re joint copyright owner, threaten DMCA takedown of all episodes you co-created unless access restored (nuclear option – may get entire channel terminated)

YouTube Channel Recovery:

• If you previously had channel manager access, YouTube may have record – cite this in support request
• If you appear in videos, cite copyright ownership in your appearance/performance
• If channel terminates due to dispute, both parties lose – use as negotiation leverage
• Court order is most effective: Judge orders account holder to provide access or transfer ownership

Podcast RSS Feed Control:

• RSS feed ownership depends on hosting platform account
• If locked out of hosting account, can’t update/control feed distribution to Apple Podcasts, Spotify, etc.
• Strategy: Contact hosting provider, explain dispute, request they freeze account or require court order before changes
• Nuclear option: Create NEW podcast feed under your control, contact Apple/Spotify to transfer subscribers (requires proving ownership – difficult)

Social Media Account Disputes:

• Personal accounts (Instagram, Twitter, TikTok) nearly impossible to recover without original owner cooperation
• Business accounts (Facebook Page, Instagram Business) may have multiple admins – harder to lock out
• If locked out: (1) Try platform account recovery, (2) Legal demand + threaten trademark infringement claim if account uses show name you co-own, (3) Court order is best option
• Practical reality: May need to start fresh on new account and rebuild following

• Emergency TRO/injunction to restore account access after lockout
• Partnership dissolution and asset division
• Buyout negotiation and valuation
• Revenue accounting demands and enforcement
• Copyright/joint authorship disputes
• Trademark ownership and use disputes
• Platform account recovery assistance
• Drafting co-creator agreements (before conflicts arise)
• Business entity formation (LLC/Corp for channels)

• Obtained TRO restoring co-host’s access to podcast accounts within 72 hours of lockout; negotiated $180k buyout
• Represented YouTube co-creator in revenue dispute; recovered $95k in withheld AdSense revenue
• Negotiated podcast channel sale for $425k; split proceeds 50/50 between deadlocked co-creators
• Dissolved partnership and divided assets: one co-creator kept channel, paid other $200k buyout
• Defended client against false partnership claim; proved client was sole owner; plaintiff recovered nothing

• Emergency TRO filing: Flat fee ($3,500-$7,500) for emergency motion + hearing
• Demand letter (access restoration or revenue): Flat fee ($1,500-$2,500)
• Buyout negotiation: Hourly ($300-$500/hr) or percentage of buyout achieved (5-10%)
• Revenue accounting + recovery: Contingency (33-40% of recovered revenue)
• Partnership dissolution litigation: Hourly ($300-$500/hr) or hybrid (reduced hourly + percentage of recovery/buyout)
• Co-creator agreement drafting: Flat fee ($2,000-$5,000 depending on complexity)
• Channel valuation: Flat fee ($1,000-$2,500) for detailed appraisal report

Book a call to discuss your podcast/YouTube dispute. Whether you’ve been locked out, partner won’t share revenue, or you need help negotiating a buyout, I’ll assess your situation and recommend strategy.

Email: owner@terms.law