The acquisition deal involving Indian company VideoVerse, announced in September 2025 at a value of $250 million, has turned into a web of lawsuits and allegations of fraud and document forgery, while investors are still waiting for their share of the deal’s proceeds. The company’s co-founder, Vinayak Shrivastav, is facing multiple cases, while Minute Media announced in May that it was ending its contract with VideoVerse.
The deal had appeared to be a major achievement for Indian startups. VideoVerse began as a simple clip-cutting service, then developed its business through incubators and client offerings, until it was acquired by Minute Media, an international sports publisher whose operations are divided between New York and Tel Aviv. Minute Media had planned to expand the VideoVerse program beyond the Indian market, particularly in international sports.
A Deal That Ended in a Legal Split
Less than a year after the announcement, the deal began to unravel. A representative of Minute Media said the company decided to end its relationship with VideoVerse after discovering “significant discrepancies,” among other things, in the data and representations provided by the company. The source explained that the two companies continued to operate as separate legal entities even after the deal closed.
Lawsuits filed by investors and creditors allege that Shrivastav used the image of a successful company to accumulate debt and arrange side financial agreements, allegations he has denied by failing to respond to TechCrunch’s multiple attempts to contact him. The details of the cases and the fate of the funds remain disputed before the courts.
Allegations from Investors and Creditors
Bluestone Capital, which backed VideoVerse in a 2023 funding round, sued the company for fraud, alleging that it violated the investment terms and refused to distribute the acquisition proceeds. In a separate case, a creditor is seeking to recover $64 million from a loan Shrivastav obtained shortly after the deal closed.
The creditor’s complaint alleges that Shrivastav used fraudulent merger documents that did not reflect the terms of the agreement he reached with Minute Media, in order to persuade shareholders of Clippings to approve the merger. VideoVerse’s former chief operating officer, Sabia Das, also accuses him of forging his signature on loan and share-repurchase agreements, which, according to the lawsuit, led to tens of millions of dollars being extracted from the company.
A $55 Million Loan and Disputed Documents
In October, Shrivastav arranged a $55 million structured loan with investment firm Lingotto, reportedly intended to repay a previous creditor. According to a court filing submitted by Lingotto, $53 million was transferred to an account controlled by Clippings on October 1, with a regular repayment schedule.
Lingotto later said that key documents provided by Shrivastav were forged. The allegations include that Minute Media’s chief executive did not sign the documents and that screenshots purportedly showing internal bank balances had been fabricated. A $4 million payment to Lingotto was due on March 31, but it did not arrive. When the company demanded full repayment of the loan with interest, it discovered that a large number of creditors were waiting for amounts owed to them.
A Profitable Business and an Unclear Fate
VideoVerse was a significant player in the clip-cutting market, providing automated tools to turn long broadcasts into short clips suitable for social media platforms. Its flagship product, Magnifi, used artificial intelligence to automatically identify players and important moments, such as creating a package containing every three-point shot in a basketball game, with the support of a large human team.
The platform attracted prominent clients, including the Indian Premier League, FIFA+, and Nippon TV, while Minute Media hoped to use it to expand into the U.S. market. But the overlapping cases before the Delaware Court of Chancery, involving Minute Media, Lingotto, and Bluestone, have left the company’s financial position and the fate of the funds unclear. By the end of April, Shrivastav was no longer serving as chief executive.