Who is suing OpenAI and where?

• OpenAI facing its first lawsuit from Indian firms
• India is second largest market for the ChatGPT maker
• OpenAI points to unsuccessful cases across the world

NEW DELHI - Indian music producers and publishers are seeking to join the news agency ANI in suing OpenAI, accusing the maker of ChatGPT of copyright infringement in the company's second biggest market after the United States.

The case could have serious implications for how India, an emerging key player in the global AI landscape, regulates generative AI (GenAI).

India's AI sector is expected to grow significantly to reach $22 billion by 2027, up from its current value of between $7 billion and $10 billion, according to a 2024 report by Nasscom-EY, an association of Indian tech companies.

Here are some details about the court case against OpenAI in India:

Who is Suing OpenAI in India and why?

Indian news agency ANI filed a lawsuit in the Delhi High Court in November last year, accusing OpenAI of using its content without permission to train its large language models (LLMs), including ChatGPT.

Since then, book publishers and media groups, some backed by billionaires Mukesh Ambani and Gautam Adani, have asked to join the ANI lawsuit against OpenAI.

Two of India's largest music labels, Saregama and T-Series, and the Indian Music Industry (IMI), which represents Sony Music and Warner Music in India, asked to join the case last week over concerns about what it said were "unauthorised use of sound recordings" in training OpenAI's artificial intelligence models.

So far, the New Delhi court has said that each party must file individual suits and said the lawsuit filed by ANI cannot be expanded to include other plaintiffs. The next hearing is on Friday.

What are the main arguments and demands of the lawsuits?

The companies are seeking damages and an injunction to stop OpenAI using their copyrighted content without permission. ANI alone has sought 20 million rupees ($230,300) in damages.

OpenAI has argued it is sticking to "fair use" principles and only using publicly available data to train its AI models.

The company says has ANI has not provided specific examples of its copyrighted material being reproduced by ChatGPT. It also told the court that it had blocked ANI's domain in October to prevent use of its material.

Additionally, OpenAI argues that the lawsuit lacks jurisdictional grounds because its servers are located outside India, pointing out that none of the lawsuits it has faced elsewhere, including in the United States, Canada and Germany, have resulted in rulings of copyright infringement.

In India's copyright law, decisions on "fair use" are decided on a case-by-case basis, and the economic impact of unauthorised use plays a crucial role in this determination.

Has OpenAI received similar lawsuits anywhere else?

OpenAI is facing similar lawsuits in other countries.

In the United States, authors like Sarah Silverman and John Grisham have sued OpenAI over alleged copyright infringement.

The authors complained that ChatGPT offers detailed plot summaries of copyrighted books on demand, citing this as evidence that OpenAI used the books to train its AI. Indian publishers are also making similar claims.

In November, the German music royalty collection and licensing body GEMA sued OpenAI alleging that ChatGPT reproduces protected lyrics without having acquired licenses or paid the songwriters.

OpenAI is just one example, copyright holders around the world are taking GenAI companies to court. For instance, the maker of Claude chatbot Anthropic is facing a lawsuit brought by music publishers Universal, Concord and ABKCO, alleging reproduction of copyrighted lyrics without permission and plagiarism.

Similarly, AI-backed music-making services, Suno and Udio, faced lawsuits by record labels owned by Sony Music, Universal Music Group and Warner Music Group.

With growing use globally the outcome of these lawsuits will have significant implications for the future of generative AI and copyright law.

($1 = 86.8420 Indian rupees)

(Reporting by Bhasker Tripathi; Editing by Jon Hemming.)