LawChakra

Delhi High Court Asks OpenAI to Respond to Indian Music Industry’s Intervention in ANI’s Copyright Case

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

Last week, IMI, along with leading music companies T-Series and Saregama India, approached the Delhi High Court to become part of ANI’s case against OpenAI.

NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court on Monday, 17th Feb, directed OpenAI, the creator of ChatGPT, to submit a response regarding an application filed by the Indian Music Industry (IMI).

IMI wants to join a copyright lawsuit filed by news agency Asian News International (ANI) against OpenAI. ANI has accused OpenAI of using its content without permission to train and run ChatGPT.

Last week, IMI, along with leading music companies T-Series and Saregama India, approached the Delhi High Court to become part of ANI’s case against OpenAI.

However, Justice Amit Bansal noted that expanding the case further may not be feasible.

He said, “We can’t keep expanding the scope of the suit; you can file your own suit. Hundreds of industries may be affected by it.”

Senior Advocate Chander Lall, representing IMI, insisted that the music industry is directly affected by this lawsuit. He assured the court that IMI would not complicate the case further.

“We will not go a step beyond the scope. We will come in the end, we will only supplement on what is left. Allow us to present arguments on law,” he said.

Lall also highlighted the broader impact of the case on copyright laws in India.

He stated, “What my Lord will decide will determine the Copyrights Act going forward. If we all file suits, it will create a bigger chaos.”

OpenAI’s legal team pointed out that the matter is already scheduled for hearing on Friday, February 21. Justice Bansal acknowledged this and agreed to consider IMI’s plea on the same day.

“Have it on the same day, we will see,” he said.

The court then issued notices to all parties involved, allowing them to submit responses to IMI’s application. ANI’s lawyer, Advocate Sidhant Kumar, sought permission to file a reply against IMI’s intervention request. He argued that the primary issue in the case relates to audio rights.

Amicus Curiae Adarsh Ramanujan was also present to assist the court in the matter.

FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE

Exit mobile version