ANI vs OpenAI: Delhi HC to hear India’s first GenAI copyright suit starting 21 February

This marks the first copyright dispute involving OpenAI in India, with ANI accusing the company of using its copyrighted content to train its large language models (LLMs), including the widely used ChatGPT. 

Additional hearings have been scheduled for 11 March and 18 March.

The single bench, led by justice Amit Bansal, also sought OpenAI’s response to applications from the Federation of Indian Publishers and the Digital News Publishers Association, which are seeking to intervene in the case.

The case is set to explore key legal issues surrounding generative artificial intelligence (GenAI), including how India will regulate AI technologies in relation to copyright infringement. The lawsuit follows a wave of similar challenges against OpenAI globally, including by major media organizations such as The New York Times, which is seeking billions in damages for the alleged illegal use of its archives to train AI models.

Read this | Mint Explainer: The OpenAI case and what’s at stake for AI and copyright in India

The outcome of this case could have significant implications for OpenAI’s operations in India, which accounts for roughly 9.5% of ChatGPT’s 300 million weekly active users, or about 28.5 million users. 

India is poised to become a major hub for artificial intelligence, with its AI sector projected to grow significantly by 2027. According to a Nasscom-EY report, India’s AI market is expected to grow at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 25-35%, reaching $22 billion by 2027, up from its current value of $7-10 billion.

OpenAI, founded in 2015 by Sam Altman, Greg Brockman, Elon Musk, and others, launched ChatGPT in November 2022. Within five days of its release, the chatbot attracted over one million users, propelling OpenAI into the spotlight. The company has since attracted a billion-dollar investment from Microsoft.

Jurisdictional and copyright issues

The Delhi High Court will address several complex legal issues in the case, including whether a lawsuit can be filed against a foreign-based language model, given that OpenAI’s servers are located outside India. OpenAI has raised concerns about jurisdictional matters, arguing that its operations fall outside Indian legal territory.

To help navigate the intricacies of the case, the court has appointed two amici curiae: Arul George Scaria, Professor of Law at NLSIU Bengaluru, and advocate Adarsh Ramanujan.

“The judiciary’s recognition of the economic impact of unlicensed content use could pave the way for royalties or compensatory mechanisms for content owners," notes Tushar Kumar, Advocate, Supreme Court of India. “At a broader level, this case may prompt the Indian Parliament to legislate AI-specific laws, encompassing not only copyright concerns but also ancillary issues such as data privacy, transparency, and ethical AI deployment."

Filed in November 2024, the lawsuit by ANI alleges that OpenAI used its copyrighted content without permission to train its models. ANI seeks ₹2 crore in damages and an injunction preventing OpenAI from storing, publishing, or reproducing its copyrighted material. 

Initially, the court refused to grant an interim injunction against OpenAI, citing the complexity of the case, but the matter now involves additional parties: the Federation of Indian Publishers and the Digital News Publishers Association (DNPA), both of which represent major publishing houses and media outlets. HT Media Ltd, which publishes Mint, is a member of DNPA.

The Federation and DNPA argue that OpenAI’s use of publicly available content—such as book summaries and excerpts—constitutes an infringement of intellectual property rights. These groups contend that OpenAI’s actions undermine the value of original work and harm the revenue streams of media outlets by depriving them of advertising income.

ANI’s lawsuit is built on three key allegations. First, ANI claims that OpenAI used its publicly available copyrighted material to train its LLMs without consent. Second, ANI points to instances where ChatGPT allegedly generated responses that closely resembled or were verbatim copies of its copyrighted material. Third, ANI has raised concerns about "hallucinated" responses—where ChatGPT generates false or fabricated information, potentially spreading misinformation, particularly in sensitive political contexts.

Read this | OpenAI vs ANI: Why ‘hallucinations’ are unlikely to go away soon

In its defence, OpenAI has denied any wrongdoing, saying that copyright law protects the expression of ideas, not the ideas themselves. The company also argued that ANI has failed to provide specific examples of its copyrighted material being reproduced by ChatGPT.

OpenAI also contends that it blocklisted ANI’s domain in October to prevent any future use of its material in training its models. Additionally, the company asserts that the lawsuit lacks jurisdictional grounds due to its servers being located outside India. OpenAI pointed out that none of the lawsuits it has faced globally, including those in the US, Canada, and Germany, have resulted in injunctions or rulings of copyright infringement.

“The ruling could influence India’s approach to regulating generative AI, particularly regarding ‘fair use’ under copyright law, which currently lacks clear guidelines for AI-related activities," says Raheel Patel, Partner, Gandhi Law Associates. “Additionally, OpenAI argues that Indian courts lack jurisdiction due to its foreign servers, complicating cross-border legal matters and highlighting the need for international AI governance."

“Furthermore, it might trigger legislative reforms to update the Copyright Act of 1957," adds Patel.

Also read | In charts: How AI companies' data hunt is sparking copyright wars

As the case progresses, it could set significant precedents for AI-related copyright disputes in India and globally. The outcome may play a pivotal role in shaping the future regulatory landscape for generative AI technologies.