Delhi HC dismisses allegations of copyright infringement against ChatGPT
The dispute began in November 2024 when ANI sued OpenAI, alleging that the company used its copyrighted news reports without permission to train ChatGPT
New Delhi: In a relief to OpenAI, the Delhi High Court on Friday dismissed allegations of copyright infringement against the ChatGPT parent, rejecting the lawsuit filed by news agency Asian News International (ANI), publishers' bodies and the Indian music industry.
The court found no copyright infringement in the San Francisco-based company's use of copyrighted material to train its large language models (LLMs), holding that such use falls within the exceptions under Section 52 of the Copyright Act.
In the first-ever lawsuit copyright suit against ChatGPT in India, the court ruled that ChatGPT's outputs were not substantially similar to ANI's copyrighted works and that the news agency had failed to establish that the chatbot memorised or reproduced its original content.
The court said granting an injunction against OpenAI would cause irreparable harm not only to the company but also to the public, which benefits from AI services.
The first major ruling on generative AI copyright concerns by an Indian court is likely to influence how courts interpret copyright law in the age of generative AI and define the obligations of AI developers operating in India.
The dispute began in November 2024 when news agency Asian News International (ANI) sued OpenAI, alleging that the company used its copyrighted news reports without permission to train ChatGPT. ANI has also claimed that the chatbot can reproduce portions of its content and generate inaccurate or "hallucinated" responses attributed to the agency, potentially harming its credibility.
The case later expanded beyond ANI, with the Federation of Indian Publishers (FIP), the Digital News Publishers Association (DNPA), and the Indian music industry (IMI) joining as intervenors, broadening the copyright challenge to include publishers and music labels.
The members of FIP and the DNPA include HT Digital/HT Media (publisher of Mint and Hindustan Times), The Hindu, India Today, Network18, NDTV, Indian Express, ABP Group, Dainik Jagran, and Times Internet. T-Series, Saregama India, and Sony Music India were the companies in the music industry that backed the plea.
These bodies have argued that using publicly available copyrighted content to train AI models without a licence infringes intellectual property rights and undermines the economic value of original journalism and creativity. IMI has further alleged that OpenAI used copyrighted sound recordings, lyrics and musical compositions to train its AI models without obtaining licences or permission.
OpenAI has denied the allegations. It has argued that copyright protects the expression of ideas, not the underlying facts, and that ANI has failed to identify specific instances where ChatGPT unlawfully reproduced its work. The company has also said it blocked ANI's website from future training of its models in October 2024.
OpenAI has said that AI models are trained on publicly available data and learn statistical patterns rather than reproducing copyrighted works
The company has further challenged the maintainability of the suit, arguing that Indian courts lack jurisdiction because its servers and core infrastructure are located outside the country.
Given the novelty of the issues involved, the court appointed Professor Arul George Scaria of the National Law School of India University, Bengaluru, and advocate Adarsh Ramanujan as *amici curiae* to assist it. The judgment comes after 32 hearings, with arguments concluding on 27 March.
The verdict is also being closely watched because of India's importance to OpenAI. The company has said the country accounts for around 100 million weekly active ChatGPT users, making it one of its largest markets globally. According to Statcounter, ChatGPT held nearly 78% of India's AI chatbot market in June 2026, well ahead of competitors such as Google Gemini, Claude, Microsoft Copilot and Perplexity.
The ruling comes amid a growing number of copyright lawsuits against AI companies around the world. OpenAI is facing similar litigation in the United States and other jurisdictions, including a high-profile case brought by *The New York Times*, which alleges that millions of its articles were used without permission to train AI models.
About the Authors
Krishna Yadav
Krishna Yadav is a Senior Correspondent at Mint, based in New Delhi, and part of the corporate bureau. He joined the newsroom as a trainee in 2023 and quickly grew into his current role. He writes on legal and regulatory developments in corporate India, with a focus on insolvency, taxation, company law, and policy. His reporting includes tracking and breaking key legal stories from the Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, NCLT, and NCLAT.
With a background in law, Krishna is known for simplifying complex legal developments into clear, accessible stories for readers. His work focuses on trends in corporate law and policy that affect businesses. This ranges from explaining tax disputes—like whether coconut hair oil is edible—to writing on why celebrities are seeking personal rights protection. He closely tracks India’s insolvency system, covering issues such as creditor losses, gaps in the process, and challenges in how the framework works in practice.
Krishna also tracks developments within law firms—covering hiring trends, how firms help companies navigate global challenges, and how the legal industry is adapting to artificial intelligence. Beyond legal reporting, he has written long-form pieces, including on-ground coverage of the 2024 general elections, capturing the scale and logistics of polling across India.
Outside work, he enjoys travelling, exploring new places, and reading about geopolitics and history.
Yash Tiwari
Yash Tiwari is a Mumbai-based journalist who reports on corporate and regulatory developments, with a focus on court-driven policy shifts and the intersection of law and public policy. He has been in the profession for two years. Before joining Mint, he worked at NDTV Profit as an assistant producer on the TV desk while also reporting, gaining experience across television and print journalism and combining reporting with production expertise.
Born in Kolkata, a city he remains deeply connected to, Yash has a keen interest in the technicalities of Indian law and aims to decode complex legal developments in a clear and accessible manner for readers. He is a graduate of the Asian College of Journalism, Chennai, where he completed his postgraduate diploma in journalism.
He closely follows politics and government policies, and has covered several state elections as a freelance journalist. His work is driven by the idea of making law less intimidating and more understandable for the general public.
When not at work, Yash can be found playing cricket, revisiting classic matches, or engaging in conversations about the evolving landscape of law and policy in India.
Source: Livemint — Companies
