Opinion National Interest PoV 50-Word Edit

ThePrint On Camera Videos In Pictures

Society & Culture Around Town Book Excerpts Vigyapanti The Dating Story

More Judiciary Education YourTurn Work With Us Campus Voice

Opinion National Interest PoV 50-Word Edit

ThePrint On Camera Videos In Pictures

Society & Culture Around Town Book Excerpts Vigyapanti The Dating Story

More Judiciary Education YourTurn Work With Us Campus Voice

ChatGPT can write like us, copy our smiles. Indian copyright law must catch up

Original content, including speeches, articles, and published works, can be replicated with alarming ease by AI. Indian Copyright Act 1957 must rise to the challenge.

There is a story found in the Puranas. An erstwhile Raja enjoyed listening to poetry, but with a catch. He would give the court poet a few words every morning, and the poet would spew out verse using those self-same words and be rewarded with gold coins. But courtiers, envious of the Raja’s fascination with the poet, decided to follow him to see his modus operandi. They were rather surprised to find him going from house to house like a mendicant, seeking alms. When questioned about what happened to his earnings, he said that the person who gives the words is the one who deserves the credit for the poetry, and therefore the earnings belong to the “prompter”.

Much like the person who gives the prompts to AI.

This was an interesting dilemma that was brought to my attention during a legal discussion. I was approached by a client to take up a brief involving music licences, ownership of copyright, and copyright infringement. During a heated discussion over AI, a hypothetical scenario was presented to me. A musician creates a song using ChatGPT by providing certain prompts. She then sets it to music and releases the ‘original’ song, which goes on to become a superhit. The song in question sets the musician onto a path to superstardom, and she generates a hefty income through live performances, sales on streaming platforms, collaborations, and more.

The question that came up was this: does AI or OpenAI have a share in the proceeds, earnings, or income so generated? To what extent can AI claim a percentage of the profits generated from the performances of this piece of music? This question can also be extended to royalties from books that have used AI for inspiration, brainstorming ideas, and plotting out the storyline.

It raises a larger debate around authorship, ownership, and ethics, and was one of the issues discussed at the recently concluded national conclave, ‘Authorless Horizons: AI, Authorship, and the Emerging Creative Ecosystem’, at the India International Centre, New Delhi.

Also Read: From summer camps to ISRO missions—Indian women are leading STEM

Ethics and ownership of AI-generated content

At a conclave session titled ‘Authorship, Ownership and Ethics: Legal Challenges in the Age of AI’, authors of eminence, scholars, and academicians came together to engage in discourse on the numerous ethical and moral dilemmas that will arise as dependency on AI and its tools increases.

I read a lot on AI, and found that the session raised many pertinent and thought-provoking questions, with engaging discussions.

Academicians debate whether there are foolproof ways to........

© ThePrint