AI Lawsuits Hit India: Copyright Act Under Fire
Overview
Generative AI's rapid rise exposes deep flaws in India's Copyright Act 1957. As AI creates text, images, and music, legal battles erupt over training data usage. India's government is proposing a 'hybrid licensing' framework to balance innovation with creator rights, aiming to protect the nation's ₹2.5 trillion creative economy.
India's Copyright Act Strains Under AI's Creative Assault
India's burgeoning creative industries, valued at approximately ₹2.5 trillion, face an existential threat from generative artificial intelligence. AI systems capable of producing content by training on vast copyrighted works are exposing significant gaps in the nation's Copyright Act 1957, a law predating modern AI by decades.
Statutory Framework and Critical Gaps
The core issue lies in the Copyright Act's definition of 'author,' which exclusively implies a natural person. Even the provision for 'computer-generated' works falls short for sophisticated AI, leaving works generated autonomously in a legal vacuum. Ownership becomes uncertain, and unlike some international frameworks, Indian law lacks a clear mechanism for defining the 'arranger' of AI-created works.
Furthermore, Section 52's 'fair dealing' exceptions are too narrowly prescriptive for AI training. Text and data mining, crucial for machine learning, involves reproduction rights that are not easily accommodated under existing categories. The government has acknowledged that commercial AI training on copyrighted materials without authorization constitutes infringement.
Landmark Litigation and Emerging Jurisprudence
The Delhi High Court is currently hearing a landmark case where Asian News International (ANI) alleges OpenAI used its copyrighted news content for ChatGPT training without permission. This case could redefine copyright jurisprudence in the AI era, with major publishers and music labels intervening.
Separately, the Bombay High Court has issued an injunction protecting singer Arijit Singh's voice from AI cloning, establishing a precedent against unauthorized voice synthesis and extending to personality rights, building on earlier judgments concerning deepfakes of celebrities and professionals.
DPIIT's Hybrid Licensing Proposal
In response, the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT) has proposed a revolutionary 'hybrid model.' This involves a mandatory blanket license for AI developers to use copyrighted works for training, coupled with a royalty system. A collective body would manage and distribute these royalties, applying retroactively. This approach aims to provide guaranteed compensation to rights holders while enabling AI innovation.
Economic Impact and Stakeholder Positions
With creative employment comprising 40 million workers, the economic stakes are immense. The music and visual arts sectors are particularly vulnerable to AI replication. While creative industry stakeholders push for licensing-based frameworks to protect incentives, the tech industry advocates for innovation-enabling policies, citing India's significant AI patent filings. Decisions made now will shape the future of India's creative economy amidst the global AI revolution.
