TLDR: A pivotal lawsuit is unfolding in the Delhi High Court between Asian News International (ANI) and OpenAI, challenging the use of copyrighted journalistic content for training generative AI models like ChatGPT. ANI alleges copyright infringement under Indian law, claiming unauthorized use of its news material for commercial gain. OpenAI counters that its LLM training occurs outside India and that Indian copyright law does not apply extraterritorially. This case is set to establish a crucial precedent for intellectual property rights in the rapidly evolving landscape of artificial intelligence in India.
The Delhi High Court is currently presiding over a landmark copyright infringement lawsuit filed by Asian News International (ANI), a prominent Indian multimedia news agency, against OpenAI, the creator of the generative AI chatbot ChatGPT. The case, ANI Media Pvt Ltd v. OpenAI Inc & Anr, is the first of its kind in India and is poised to significantly shape the future of copyright law in the context of artificial intelligence within the country.
At the heart of the dispute is ANI’s accusation that OpenAI has illegally utilized its copyrighted news content to train ChatGPT’s large language models (LLMs) without obtaining proper licenses or consent. ANI contends that its original journalistic works, which involve research-led reporting and editorial transformation of raw information into literary material, are protected under Sections 13, 17, 51, and 55 of the Indian Copyright Act, 1957. The news agency claims that ChatGPT has produced responses that are either exact replicas of or strikingly similar to its published articles, constituting unauthorized reproduction and commercial exploitation of its intellectual property.
The genesis of the legal battle dates back to October 2024, when ANI issued a cease-and-desist notice to OpenAI and proposed a licensing agreement, which OpenAI reportedly refused. Subsequently, in November 2024, ANI filed a copyright infringement complaint with the Delhi High Court. Justice Amit Bansal issued summons in the suit and appointed an amicus curiae, acknowledging the complexity and wide-ranging issues involved.
OpenAI, in its response filed in February 2025, has vehemently denied the allegations and challenged the jurisdiction of Indian courts. Represented by Senior Advocate Amit Sibal, OpenAI argues that its LLM training processes occur exclusively outside Indian borders, and therefore, the provisions of the Indian Copyright Act, 1957, do not apply extraterritorially. OpenAI’s legal team asserts that while the expression of ideas receives copyright protection, the fundamental elements used by machine learning models do not qualify for such protection. Furthermore, OpenAI claims that it does not reproduce any of ANI’s material within India, as its servers are located abroad, thus negating any cause of action for ANI in India. OpenAI also stated that as of October 2024, it had already blocked ANI’s domain, implying ANI had the option to prevent its content from being accessed.
The Delhi High Court is tasked with addressing several fundamental questions, including whether OpenAI’s storage and use of ANI’s content during ChatGPT training constitutes copyright infringement under Indian law, and crucially, whether such use qualifies as ‘fair use’ under Section 52 of the Copyright Act, 1957. Section 52 outlines limitations on copyright owners’ rights and specifies acts that do not constitute infringement, often referred to as fair dealing or fair use. The narrow interpretation of fair dealing under this section suggests that the Act currently lacks specific provisions for AI-generated content, raising the bar for OpenAI to demonstrate that its use of data does not infringe copyright.
Also Read:
- Intellectual Property Experts Debate Generative AI’s Fair Use Implications at 9th Circuit Conference
- ChatGPT’s Global Prompt Volume Surges to 2.5 Billion Daily, India Leads Mobile Adoption
This case is considered a watershed moment in Indian intellectual property law, highlighting critical questions regarding the nature of creativity, authorship, and infringement in the age of machine-generated content. The resolution of this dispute is expected to have significant implications for how copyright law and AI technology intersect in India, influencing the rights and responsibilities of tech companies and content creators in the digital sphere. It may also prompt legislative clarification, potentially leading to mandatory disclosure norms for datasets used in training generative AI models or the establishment of statutory licensing schemes for the use of copyrighted works in AI training.
