๐๐ฎ๐ฐ๐ธ๐ด๐ฟ๐ผ๐๐ป๐ฑ ๐ผ๐ณ ๐๐ต๐ฒ ๐๐ฎ๐๐ฒ
ANI alleges that OpenAI has unauthorizedly used its copyrighted material (a) in training the AI model ChatGPT and (b) in reproducing its content as response to user queries, which not only violates copyright laws but also leads to misinformation being attributed to ANI. The court acknowledged this as a complex issue requiring careful consideration.
๐๐ฟ๐ด๐๐บ๐ฒ๐ป๐๐ ๐ณ๐ฟ๐ผ๐บ ๐๐ก๐
During the proceedings, ANI's counsel, Mr. Sidhant Kumar, articulated his case in three parts:
• The unauthorized use of ANI’s copyrighted material for training ChatGPT violates copyright laws.
• Specific instances where ChatGPT generated false/ incorrect attributions to ANI, such as incorrectly stating that Rahul Gandhi had given an interview to ANI; misquoting from the Hathras Stampede Interview and PM Narendra Modi interview.
• The potential threat to ANI’s reputation due to misinformation being disseminated.
Kumar emphasized that while OpenAI has blocked access to ANI's official website, ANI’s content shared by its subscribers (including other news outlets) will not be prevented from being accessed/ used by OpenAI, thus failing to protect their rights adequately.
Further, Mr. Kumar stated that this is not only a copyright issue but also involves issues concerning public order and spread of misinformation to the general public. He argued that this misrepresentation poses a threat to ANI’s reputation.
๐๐ฒ๐ณ๐ฒ๐ป๐๐ฒ ๐ณ๐ฟ๐ผ๐บ ๐ข๐ฝ๐ฒ๐ป๐๐
In defense, Senior Advocate Amit Sibal argued that:
• ANI's lawsuit is unprecedented in India and questioned the jurisdiction over a company without offices or servers in India.
• There are ongoing lawsuits against OpenAI in other countries with no interim relief granted against them.
• Factual information cannot be monopolized, and individuals can opt out of having their content accessed by ChatGPT.
Sibal acknowledged that while misinformation is an issue, OpenAI is actively working on improvements to reduce such occurrences.
๐๐ผ๐๐ฟ๐'๐ ๐ฅ๐ฒ๐๐ฝ๐ผ๐ป๐๐ฒ ๐ฎ๐ป๐ฑ ๐ก๐ฒ๐ ๐ ๐ฆ๐๐ฒ๐ฝ๐
Justice Bansal recognized the complexity of the issues raised and decided to appoint an amicus curie to assist in navigating the legal intricacies surrounding copyright laws and AI technologies. He indicated that a detailed hearing would be necessary before any interim orders could be considered, scheduling the next hearing for January 2025.
This case not only underscores evolving copyright challenges in the age of artificial intelligence but also sets a precedent for future legal disputes involving AI technologies and media organizations.
OpenAI ANI Legal DelhiHighCourt India AI ArtificalIntelligence Court Copyright Violation Interim
