Former Bombay HC judge Gautam Patel explored AI’s impact on copyright and trademark laws at the 5th Professor Shamnad Basheer Memorial Lecture. He addressed key issues like fair use, deepfakes, and AI-generated works. Patel questioned whether AI is a creator or merely a tool in intellectual property contexts. His insights highlighted the legal complexities of AI-driven creativity.
At the 5th Professor Shamnad Basheer Memorial Lecture, former Bombay High Court judge Justice Gautam Patel explored the complex relationship between Artificial Intelligence (AI), trademarks, and copyright law.
He highlighted the legal challenges posed by AI-generated works, fair use considerations, and the implications of deepfakes.
Justice Patel referred to a notable case where the Delhi High Court summoned OpenAI in a copyright infringement lawsuit filed by the news agency ANI.
Read Also: “AI For All”: Centre Introducing Legislation To Regulate Artificial Intelligence (AI)
He remarked,
“This case raises crucial questions about the intersection of artificial intelligence and copyright law, particularly regarding fair use and open-source exemptions.”
He posed a critical question,
“Is open source exempt from normal considerations of copyright law? For AI, does the fair use and fair dealing standard mean something different?”
The case set for a hearing in January 2025.
Discussing pattern recognition in AI, Patel explained that it involves advanced algorithms designed to analyze data inputs such as words, texts, or files. He stated,
“patterns encompass various trends in the form of repeated data,”
Illustrating this with examples like fingerprints and human faces. He noted,
“The goal of pattern recognition is based on the premise that human decision-making is often tied to the recognition of patterns.”
Justice Patel raised concerns about AI’s role in creative processes, asking,
“What are the tests to determine fair use or copyright infringement when AI creates derivative works based on copyrighted material?”
While acknowledging that AI can detect copyright infringement and plagiarism, he cautioned about potential biases and the risks of false positives and negatives.
He recounted a 2016 case where museums and researchers in the Netherlands unveiled a new artwork generated by a computer after analyzing thousands of works by the Dutch artist Rembrandt. He also mentioned a short novel written by a Japanese AI program that reached a national literary prize’s second round.
Patel asserted,
“AI is no longer just a tool like a paintbrush; it is a creator that brings works into existence independently,”
Referencing literary classics like Kafka’s Metamorphosis and Austen’s Pride and Prejudice, he questioned the copyright implications of AI-generated content. He shared his experience with ChatGPT, generating opening lines reminiscent of Anna Karenina, asking,
“Is there copyright in my own unique arrangement of keywords and phrases?”
Patel compared this to AI-generated images, posing the existential question of copyright in these creations,
“Where lies the copyright?”
He described this ambiguity as a “twilight zone in copyright law,” raising concerns about how one might pursue an infringement action in such cases.
He cited an incident involving a university student who failed after submitting an entirely AI-generated answer sheet, emphasizing the implications for academic integrity. Justice Patel explored whether AI-generated works incorporating copyrighted material could be protected as fair use, referencing landmark cases like Anderson v. Stability AI and Getty Images v. Stability AI to illustrate the evolving landscape of copyright jurisprudence in the age of AI.
He concluded with a fundamental question,
“How much of the original is too much for AI purposes?”
Read Also: AI or Authentic? LLM Student Battles University Over ‘AI-Generated’ Exam Allegation
This inquiry is particularly relevant in AI-driven image generation. Justice Patel also called for new legislation to address the challenges posed by deepfakes, emphasizing the need for awareness and detection.
Closing his address, he posed a thought-provoking question to the audience,
“Is this entire address of my evening original or wholly AI-generated?”
This remark encapsulated the ongoing debate surrounding originality and authorship in the era of AI creativity, honouring the legacy of Professor Basheer, an esteemed scholar in intellectual property law.