Copyright Protection for AI-Generated Works in India
Copyright Protection for AI-Generated Works in India
1. Introduction
With the rise of Artificial Intelligence (AI), there is growing debate on whether AI-generated works are eligible for copyright protection.
AI-generated works are those created autonomously or semi-autonomously by AI systems without direct human authorship.
The key legal question: Can copyright subsist in works created by machines without human intervention?
2. Indian Copyright Law Overview
The Copyright Act, 1957 protects “original works of authorship” in the literary, artistic, musical, and dramatic fields.
Section 2(d) defines “author” as the person who creates the work.
Protection depends on human creativity and originality.
The law does not explicitly address AI-generated works.
3. The Requirement of Human Authorship
Copyright protection traditionally requires a human author.
The concept of originality in Indian law means the work must be a product of intellectual effort of a human.
Purely mechanical or automatic processes, without human creative input, have been historically excluded.
4. AI-Generated Works: Challenges for Copyright
AI systems can produce music, paintings, writings, etc., independently.
Without a human author, the question arises: Who owns the copyright?
Is it the programmer, the user of AI, or no one?
Can an AI be treated as an “author”? Current Indian law answers no, as the law recognizes only natural persons or legal entities as authors.
5. Relevant Indian Case Law
1. Eastern Book Company & Ors v. D.B. Modak & Anr (2008) 1 SCC 1
The Supreme Court discussed originality and the threshold for copyright protection.
Emphasized human intellectual effort is essential for copyright.
While not about AI, the principles highlight that human creativity is a cornerstone for protection.
2. Govt. of India v. M/s. Taylor & Francis (2009) 2 SCC 663
Court reinforced that copyright is granted only if a work is a result of human skill and labour.
AI works lacking such input may not qualify.
3. Microsoft Corporation v. Yashwant K. Bhardwaj (Delhi High Court, 2005)
Although not directly about AI, it reiterates the necessity of human involvement for copyright in software code.
6. Position of AI-Generated Works under Indian Law
If a work is generated entirely by AI without human creativity or intervention, it may not qualify for copyright protection.
However, if a human guides, selects, or curates the AI output, the human may be considered the author.
Copyright may then subsist in the human’s contribution, not the AI per se.
7. Possible Ownership Scenarios
| Scenario | Copyright Status |
|---|---|
| Fully autonomous AI-created work | Likely no copyright protection |
| Human selects, edits, or curates AI output | Copyright may vest in the human author |
| AI used as a tool by human author | Human considered the author |
8. Policy Considerations and Emerging Views
Indian law has not yet amended the Copyright Act to explicitly address AI authorship.
Courts may rely on existing principles of originality and authorship.
The focus remains on encouraging human creativity and protecting intellectual labour.
Debate continues on whether to recognize “machine authorship” or new sui generis rights.
9. Conclusion
Currently, under Indian copyright law, AI-generated works without human authorship are unlikely to be protected.
The author must be a natural person or a legal entity deriving rights from human creators.
If a human exercises creative control or input over AI-generated content, copyright may subsist in that human’s contribution.
This area is evolving and may require legislative or judicial clarifications in the future.
RELATED Blog
0 comments