INTRODUCTION
The rapid progress of artificial intelligence (AI) and generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is having major impact on the legal landscape of intellectual property law. Over the last year, AI and GenAI has been embroiled in various controversies across creative industries globally. Most recently, the legal controversy between Studio Ghibli and OpenAI raised pertinent questions on the inadequacies of the existing IP frameworks which lack any sort of provisions governing AI or GenAI. In recent months, the legal confrontation unfolding between OpenAI and India’s prominent music labels, including T-Series, Saregama and Sony Music, is proving to be an important case study on the impact and repercussions of AI on intellectual property rights, specifically copyright.
IMPACT ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN THE MUSIC INDUSTRY
Artificial Intelligence has emerged as a revolutionary technology and its impact is being experienced on almost every industry, from healthcare and agriculture to media and entertainment. Similarly, AI is transforming the music industry across various stages, from creation to consumption. The integration of AI-powered tools in the music industry opens up new creative avenues but raises various legal complexities. Most significantly, the use of AI in adapting and manipulating existing works also raises concerns about infringement and the boundaries of fair use. Moreover, since AI systems analyse vast datasets of copyrighted musical works, the legality of the same is a contentious issue, as in the present case.
In more complex cases, AI has been used to replicate the voices of deceased singers to create new songs, raising questions of copyright infringement and unethical exploitation. This is done by inputting the existing songs of the artist into the GenAI through music sampling, usually without authorisation of the copyright holder, to create new songs, leading to infringement of copyright over the work.
OPENAI V. MUSIC INDUSTRY LABELS
The lawsuit between OpenAI and Indian content creators began in November 2024 when Asian News International (ANI), a leading Indian news agency, filed a suit for copyright infringement in the Hon’ble Delhi High Court. ANI alleged that OpenAI had used its copyrighted news content to train its AI models, most notably, ChatGPT, without seeking any authorisation from ANI for the same.
In February 2025, prominent music labels of the country, including T-Series, Saregama and Sony Music India, sought to join the ANI lawsuit. The core of this legal dispute lies in the alleged unauthorized use of copyrighted musical works by AI companies, most notably OpenAI, to train their AI models, such as ChatGPT. This has resulted in the filing of this significant lawsuit in the Delhi High Court by the major music labels, under the banner of the Indian Music Industry (IMI). This legal action underscores the growing concerns within the global music industry regarding the, potentially, large-scale erosion of the intellectual property rights and revenue streams held by the stakeholders of the music industry due to the rapid rise of AI and GenAI technologies.
The IMI contend that this practice of OpenAI, of unauthorised scraping, extraction and use of copyrighted sound recordings, lyrics, and musical compositions during the training of its AI models, would constitute a violation of their exclusive rights under Section 13 and 14 of the Copyright Act, 1957, which protects musical works. The IMI alleges that OpenAI and other AI developers have been indulging in scraping of vast quantities of musical content from the internet, including copyrighted material, to train their AI models without obtaining the necessary authorisations. As a result, the music industry would face financial distress if AI companies are allowed to freely access their copyrighted music without payment of royalties.
On the other hand, OpenAI contends that they are not bound by the copyright laws of India since their servers are located outside India. Essentially, OpenAI is arguing that since their core operations and infrastructure is based in the United States, the Indian courts lack territorial jurisdiction to adjudicate the claims of copyright infringement under the Indian copyright laws. Additionally, the next major defence available to AI companies is the doctrine of fair dealing, or the Doctrine of Fair Use, as provided under Section 52 of the Copyright Act, 1957. They may argue that the use of the copyrighted works for AI training could fall within the scope of the term “research” for the purpose of fair use. However, the scope of interpretation of “fair use” under Indian law is highly restricted as compared to the concept of “fair dealing” in the United States.
This lawsuit has been largely welcomed by the stakeholders of the Indian music industry, including composers, singers and producers, who view it as a critical step in ending the unauthorised exploitation of their creative works. Additionally, there have been growing calls for the establishment of specific legal frameworks governing the usage of copyrighted material in the training of AI models. These include licensing models and revenue-sharing mechanisms. Industry professionals are also advocating for an opt-out system that would enable creators to revoke consent if required.
This involvement of Indian music labels in this lawsuit also represents the growing global trend of copyright holders who have sought legal action against AI companies in countries like Germany and the United States. While this global effort may not be coordinated but merely coincidental, it suggests movement towards the establishment of global legal precedents which would govern how AI interacts with copyright law, and IP Law in general. A more standardised approach to AI in the field of copyright law would ensure that AI companies are bound to mandatorily respect intellectual property laws when training their AI models.
GLOBAL RESPONSES TO THE AI-MUSIC COPYRIGHT CONFLICT
Notably, the ANI v. OpenAI lawsuit is not the first of its kind. The New York Times, Getty Images and The Authors Guild, are all organisations which sued OpenAI, Stability AI and Microsoft for using their copyrighted material to train AI models, without seeking the necessary authorisations or permissions.
There is a lack of uniformity or consistency in the domestic intellectual property frameworks of different countries, including in copyright. As a result, the legal framework and jurisprudence governing AI/GenAI and copyright in musical works is significantly varied.
- In the United States of America, the doctrine of fair use is usually deemed to be central in deciding copyright infringement claims. While no AI-related copyright infringement lawsuits have been decided by the US Courts yet, the US Copyright Office has emphasised the need for human authorship as a mandatory requirement for copyright registration.
- The United Kingdom appears to be seriously considering the adoption of reforms to their current IP frameworks to make accommodations for AI development.
- The European Union’s Artificial Intelligence Act mandates transparency regarding training data and compliance of the EU’s intellectual property framework, also suggesting the labelling of AI-generated content.
In comparison to the diverse approaches employed by the above jurisdictions, the Indian approach seems to be lacking. There has been no serious consideration of improving and adapting the existing intellectual property laws to suit the growing trends and development in the creative domain.
THE FUTURE OF MUSIC COPYRIGHT IN THE AI ERA
The ongoing legal battle between the Indian music industry and OpenAI carries significant implications for the future of music creation, distribution, and consumption in India. Copyright holders are deeply concerned about the potential devaluation of their work and the loss of revenue due to the unlicensed use of their music for AI training. On the other hand, AI developers are focused on fostering innovation while navigating the complex legal landscape. The resolution of this case, and similar disputes globally, will likely shape the future business models within the music industry, potentially leading to the development of new licensing structures, revenue-sharing agreements, or even the creation of AI-specific copyright laws.
CONCLUSION
The intersection of artificial intelligence and copyright law in the Indian music industry presents a complex and rapidly evolving landscape. While AI offers tremendous potential for creativity and efficiency, it also poses significant challenges to the existing legal framework designed for human creators. The ongoing disputes between music labels and AI companies highlights the need to strike a balance between fostering technological innovation and protecting the rights and economic interests of artists and copyright holders.
Given the global nature of both AI technology and copyright law, there is a clear need for international cooperation and the harmonization of legal frameworks. This would help to effectively address the challenges posed by AI in the music industry and help to overcome issues of jurisdictional competence of the courts. Furthermore, there is a need for collaboration between AI companies and the copyright holders in implementing possible solutions in order to ensure fair compensation, copyright enforcement and allowing AI innovations to develop. Ultimately, the outcome of the OpenAI case and the broader legal and policy responses in India will be crucial in determining a path forward for both AI innovation and the continued growth and protection of the Indian music industry in the digital age.
Written by Varshika, Legal Intern at Intepat IP
