Several leading Indian media organizations, including NDTV, Indian Express, Hindustan Times, Network18 , and major book publishers like Penguin Random House and Bloomsbury, have initiated legal action against OpenAI. They allege that OpenAI trained its ChatGPT AI model using their copyrighted content without obtaining permission or providing compensation. This lawsuit was first filed by the Press Trust of India’s news agency ANI and later supported by the Digital News Publishers Association (DNPA) and the Federation of Indian Publishers (FIP).
The central allegation is that OpenAI scraped vast amounts of news articles, journalistic writings, literary works, and other creative materials, constituting copyright infringement under Indian law. These publishers argue that the unauthorized use undermines their intellectual property rights and threatens their economic viability, especially in an era when media revenues are precariously balanced.
OpenAI’s Defense and Jurisdictional Arguments
OpenAI denies wrongdoing, asserting that it trained its models only on publicly available data, which by law does not require explicit permission. The company also states that it operates outside India, with servers and AI training infrastructure located primarily overseas, challenging the jurisdiction of Indian courts in this matter. They emphasize providing an opt-out mechanism for content owners who do not wish their materials to be used, and stress compliance with applicable copyright laws.
OpenAI’s defense further claims that its use of content qualifies as fair use or falls outside infringement definitions. The company is requesting Indian courts to dismiss the case or limit the scope, averring that no specific law yet clearly restricts AI training using public internet content under Indian copyright statutes.
Legal and Policy Dimensions
The dispute has galvanized the Indian government. The Ministry of Commerce has constituted a panel composed of intellectual property experts, legal scholars, government officials, and industry representatives to examine whether India’s 1957 Copyright Act adequately addresses the challenges posed by artificial intelligence. This panel’s mandate includes analysing legal gaps, proposing legislative reforms, and guiding policymaking to effectively regulate AI development vis-à-vis copyright protections. Its findings will influence how AI entities like OpenAI operate within India’s legal framework.
Judicial authorities in India face complex, path breaking questions: How to construe “authorship” and “ownership” in AI-generated content? Whether existing copyright frameworks account for machine learning’s data reliance patterns? How to balance technological innovation and intellectual property rights without stifling either?
Court Proceedings and Industry Impact
The Delhi High Court continues to hear arguments on key issues like copyright infringement thresholds, the scope of “fair dealing,” and the applicability of data scraping defenses. The case is also a test of how Indian law will treat global AI companies with significant market impact.
For Indian publishers, the stakes are high. They argue AI companies’ use of copyrighted data without licensing undermines journalism’s revenue and journalistic integrity. This could destabilize digital content ecosystems that rely on exclusive content creation and monetization.
Conversely, AI developers warn against overly restrictive interpretations that could hinder AI innovation and scalability, which depend on large, diverse datasets. They advocate clarity and balanced regulation that fosters innovation while protecting creators’ legitimate rights.
Bollywood and other creative industries in India have also shown interest in joining the case to protect copyrights of scriptwriters, filmmakers, and artists from unauthorized AI use.
Media and Expert Commentary
Media reports describe the case as landmark, with potential global repercussions for AI training methods, copyright law interpretations, and data rights. The legal battle epitomizes struggles faced internationally between tech companies and content originators.
Experts urge updating legislation or introducing clarifications to accommodate AI’s uniqueness, emphasizing collaboration between policymakers, industry stakeholders, and rights holders for sustainable solutions.
India’s Copyright Act, originally enacted in 1957, was designed for a pre-digital era and faces significant challenges adapting to the rapid advances in artificial intelligence (AI). The rise of AI-generated content where machines create text, images, music, and other creative works raises novel legal questions about authorship, ownership, infringement, and rights enforcement. To effectively regulate and reap the benefits of AI while protecting creators’ rights, India’s Copyright Act should evolve in the following key ways:
1. Defining Authorship and Ownership of AI-Generated Works
Currently, copyright protects works created by humans, recognizing the author as the creator with exclusive rights. AI challenges this concept because algorithms autonomously generate content without direct human authorship.
Legal Recognition of AI-Created Works: The Act could introduce specific provisions clarifying whether AI-generated works qualify for copyright protection and, if so, who holds that copyright whether the AI developer, user, or a new category altogether.
Human Authorship Threshold: Establishing that copyright protection depends on some level of meaningful human input or control in the creation process can distinguish AI-assisted works from fully autonomous AI outputs.
2. Clarifying Scope of Fair Dealing and Exceptions
Existing exceptions like fair dealing permit limited unauthorized use for criticism, review, research, or education. AI training often involves copying or analyzing massive datasets containing copyrighted content.
Explicit AI Training Exception: The law could explicitly address AI training, clarifying permissible scope and conditions under which copyrighted materials may be used without infringement potentially with safeguards such as anonymization or opt-out mechanisms.
Balancing Rights and Innovation: The framework should strive to balance creators’ interests with the societal benefit of AI innovation by ensuring reasonable access and compensation models.
3. Licensing, Compensation, and Collective Management
AI companies rely on broad datasets, making individual licensing impractical.
Collective Licensing Frameworks: Enabling collective rights management organizations to license content rights on behalf of creators for AI use would streamline access and ensure fair royalties.
Transparent Usage Reporting: Mandating transparency in AI training data sources and compensations to content owners could reduce conflicts.
4. Liability and Enforcement Mechanisms
AI-generated content may infringe copyrights or propagate derivative works.
Clarifying Liability Standards: The Act should define who is liable for infringement arising from AI-generated content developers, users, or platform operators to facilitate enforcement.
Mechanisms for Redress: Strengthening enforcement tools, including notice-and-takedown processes adapted for AI-generated content, will help rights holders protect their interests.
5. Data Rights and Database Protection
AI depends on vast data pools, raising issues about the extraction and reuse of information.
Database Rights: Introducing sui generis database protection rights similar to those in the EU could protect compilations of data while fostering their lawful use in AI systems.
Data Privacy Considerations: Aligning copyright with data protection laws ensures ethical and legal collection and use of personal data within AI training sets.
6. Adaptation for Emerging Technologies
Continuous monitoring and flexibility mechanisms are needed:
Regular Updating Provisions: The Act should empower authorities to periodically revise guidelines addressing AI advancements and use cases.
Public Consultation and Expert Panels: Institutionalizing stakeholder consultations to review AI’s impact on copyright can help balance innovation and rights over time.
The judgment in the ongoing OpenAI copyright case and potential changes to India’s Copyright Act to address AI-generated content could have significant impacts on creators across multiple dimensions:
1. Enhanced Protection of Creators’ Rights
Stronger Copyright Enforcement: A favorable judgment affirming that AI training on copyrighted content without permission constitutes infringement will reinforce creators’ control over their works. This would deter unauthorized use and unauthorized commercial exploitation by AI companies.
2.Expanded Legal Clarity
Amendments defining authorship, ownership, and liability related to AI-generated content will reduce ambiguities, empowering creators to assert rights confidently and seek remedies when their works are misused.
3. Economic Benefits Through Fair Compensation
Licensing and Royalties: Legal recognition that AI companies must license copyrighted content could lead to more royalty payments flowing to creators, publishers, authors, and journalists, helping sustain creative industries facing digital disruption.
4. Collective Rights Management
Establishment or reinforcement of collective licensing mechanisms will facilitate rights clearance at scale, ensuring creators earn compensation without undue transaction complexity.
5.Encouragement of Responsible AI Development
Balanced Innovation and Rights: Clear exceptions and guidelines for permissible AI training can foster innovation while protecting creators. This promotes a fair ecosystem where creators benefit economically and ethically from AI use of their content.
6.Opt-Out Mechanisms:
Allowing creators to opt out of data pools used for AI training respects individual autonomy and creative control.
Risks and Challenges for Creators
Access to AI Tools: Overly stringent restrictions could limit availability or raise the cost of AI tools that help creators themselves generate and enhance content, thereby potentially slowing their creative processes.
Delayed Innovation Benefits: Protracted legal uncertainties might delay creators’ access to benefits AI-driven platforms offer, such as broader reach, discovery, and content personalization.
Increased Awareness and Advocacy Opportunities
Empowered Advocacy: Judicial and legislative developments raise public awareness of copyright issues associated with AI, encouraging creators to engage in policy dialogues and collective bargaining.
New Business Models: As AI disrupts traditional content usage, creators have opportunities to explore novel business or licensing models aligned with AI-driven economies.
Overall Impact
A clear, balanced legal framework emerging from the judgment and copyright law reforms will overall bolster creators’ rights, foster just economic returns from AI-driven exploitation of their work, and create a transparent environment for AI innovation. It will address long-standing concerns about unauthorized use, incentivize high-quality content creation, and shape a sustainable digital creative ecosystem in India and beyond.
As one of the most trusted Intellectual Property Law Firms in India, R K Dewan & Co. has been at the forefront of protecting creative and innovative works for over seven decades. Our team of IP specialists provides strategic guidance and legal support across all domains of intellectual property—copyright, patents, trademarks, industrial designs, and licensing. With deep expertise in emerging areas such as AI-generated content, digital media, and technology law, we help creators, publishers, and enterprises navigate complex copyright challenges and safeguard their rights in the evolving digital landscape. Whether you’re seeking to protect original content, resolve infringement disputes, or build a resilient IP portfolio, R K Dewan & Co. delivers tailored, practical, and globally aligned solutions that uphold your creative and commercial interests.