The Digital News Publishers Association (DNPA) seeks to intervene in Asian News International’s (ANI) copyright lawsuit against OpenAI for allegedly using news content without permission to train ChatGPT. The Delhi High Court allowed DNPA’s participation, clarifying it cannot expand the case’s scope. The court will decide on jurisdiction and scheduled further hearings.
New Delhi: The Digital News Publishers Association (DNPA) has sought to intervene in a copyright infringement lawsuit filed by Asian News International (ANI) against OpenAI over the alleged unauthorized use of online news content to train and operate its AI chatbot, ChatGPT. The case, titled ANI Media Pvt Ltd V/s Open AI Inc & Anr, was heard by Justice Amit Bansal of the Delhi High Court.
The court issued notices on DNPA’s intervention application, allowing the organization to participate in the case. However, Justice Bansal clarified that “the scope of the copyright suit cannot be widened by the intervenors.” The intervenors will be limited to addressing the legal issues raised in the original suit.
The DNPA, which represents prominent Indian media houses including ABP, Hindustan Times, NDTV, The Times of India, and others, has aligned with ANI, alleging that OpenAI infringed on copyrights by using news content, including content behind paywalls, without authorization.
During the hearing, the court took strong objection to the publication of OpenAI’s written submissions in the media before the arguments were heard.
“Just because you are in the business of publishing news, everything can’t be reported. We have to be guarded on this,”
Justice Bansal remarked.
The court also questioned why the DNPA chose to file an intervention application rather than a separate lawsuit. Nevertheless, it issued notice on the intervention plea, with ANI not opposing DNPA’s involvement.
Senior Advocate Amit Sibal, representing OpenAI, requested time to respond to DNPA’s application. He argued that the DNPA lacked proper authorization to file the intervention and was raising new issues unrelated to ANI’s claims.
“They (DNPA) are alleging that we (OpenAI) are going behind paywalls to get access to matters not publicly available,”
Sibal pointed out, emphasizing that the issues raised by DNPA differ from those of ANI.
Sibal also raised a territorial jurisdiction objection, contending that since OpenAI is based in the United States, Indian courts lack jurisdiction over the matter. He noted that OpenAI’s model training occurs outside India, and ANI’s grievance is governed by OpenAI’s Terms of Use, which assigns jurisdiction to California courts.
The court responded that
“the aspect of territorial jurisdiction will be considered while deciding the application for interim injunction.”
ANI has accused OpenAI of exploiting its original content for commercial gain without permission. The news agency also claimed that ChatGPT has occasionally provided false information, incorrectly attributing ANI as the source. ANI argued that this not only damages its reputation but also risks spreading fake news.
The court has scheduled three dates for further hearings: February 21, March 11, and March 18, 2025. In the meantime, the DNPA has been directed to submit a resolution proving its authorization to file the intervention.
Legal Teams and Representation
- ANI: Advocate Sidhant Kumar.
- DNPA: Senior Advocate Saikrishna.
- OpenAI: Senior Advocate Amit Sibal and a legal team from Khaitan & Co, including advocates Sanjeev Kapoor, Madhav Khosla, and Nirupam Lodha.
- Amici Curiae: Adarsh Ramanujan and Arul George Scaria.
Case Title – ANI Media Pvt Ltd V/s Open AI Inc & Anr
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
