OPENAI CLAIMS COPYRIGHT ACT, 1957 DOESNOT APPLY IN ANI CASE (April 3, 2025)  

Authored by Mr. Abhishek (A student of Symbiosis Law School, Noida)

OpenAI, the developer behind ChatGPT, has presented a new defence before the Delhi High Court in the case of ANI V. OpenAI. ANI filed a case against OpenAI for using copyrighted content to train its artificial intelligence chatbot, ChatGPT, without authorization. Senior Advocate Amit Sibal, representing OpenAI, asserted that since the training of its Large Language Model (LLM) and data storage occur outside India, the Indian Copyright Act does not extend to the company’s activities. Sibal emphasized that no part of the alleged infringement has taken place within Indian territory and that the Copyright Act’s jurisdiction is limited to India.

“Any action that is claimed to be infringement must take place in the four corners of this country. If it doesn’t, that particular action can’t be infringement,” argued Sibal before the court.

 

ANI’s Allegations of Copyright Violation

ANI Media Pvt Ltd contends that OpenAI scraped its content from its website and subscriber data to train ChatGPT, thereby infringing its copyright for commercial benefit. ANI has accused OpenAI of using its proprietary content without permission, raising significant concerns over the protection of journalistic material in the digital age.

According to ANI, OpenAI’s alleged actions amount to copyright infringement as the chatbot’s responses might incorporate ANI’s news content without proper attribution. The case has sparked broader discussions on the intersection of artificial intelligence, data usage, and copyright laws in India.

 

OpenAI Denies Storing ANI’s Data in India

In response to ANI’s claims, OpenAI has maintained that it does not store ANI’s data in India and does not use it for generating responses through ChatGPT. Sibal underscored that there is no evidence to suggest that OpenAI’s AI models retain or reproduce verbatim content from ANI’s website or subscriber services.

“The LLM does not store data verbatim from specific sources but rather uses vast, diverse datasets, learning from linguistic structures and grammar in the public domain,” Sibal stated. He further explained that the AI model does not retain or replicate specific copyrighted articles but generates responses based on language patterns derived from publicly available information.

 

Legal Debate Over Copyright and AI Training

One of the central arguments in the case revolves around the definition of copyright infringement under Indian law. Sibal argued that the use of data in AI training does not violate the Copyright Act, as the law protects only the expression of ideas, not the ideas themselves or the factual content used to train AI models.

He emphasized that AI training involves analysing language structures rather than copying specific articles. This distinction, according to OpenAI, means that its operations fall outside the scope of copyright infringement as defined by Indian law.

 

Key Issues Before the Delhi High Court

As the case proceeds, the Delhi High Court is considering four key issues:

  1. Whether OpenAI’s storage and use of ANI’s data amount to copyright infringement under Indian law.
  2. Whether the Indian Copyright Act applies to OpenAI’s operations given that its data storage and training occur outside India.
  3. Whether the alleged actions by OpenAI qualify for fair use under Indian copyright law.
  4. The broader implications of AI-generated content and the extent to which AI models can utilize publicly available data without violating copyright laws.

The High Court’s decision on these matters is expected to set a crucial precedent for the use of AI in content generation and copyright protection in India.

 

What’s Next?

With OpenAI continuing its legal arguments in the next hearing, the case is being closely watched by the media and technology sectors. If the court rules in favour of ANI, it could impose stricter regulations on AI companies operating in India and potentially impact how AI models are trained globally.

Conversely, a ruling favouring OpenAI could establish a legal precedent allowing AI developers more freedom in utilizing publicly available data for machine learning purposes. The outcome may also influence future policy discussions regarding copyright laws and their applicability to AI-generated content.

As AI continues to evolve and reshape industries, this case underscores the growing tension between technological innovation and intellectual property rights. The Delhi High Court’s ruling will likely have significant implications for AI developers, media organizations, and legal frameworks governing digital content in India and beyond.

 

REFERENCING