Book publishers and digital media outlets have united in a legal case against OpenAI, currently being heard in New Delhi. This case has significant implications for the legal framework governing artificial intelligence in India. At the heart of the dispute is OpenAI's ChatGPT service, which the Federation of Indian Publishers claims produces book summaries and extracts from unlicensed online copies. The Federation represents several Indian firms, including notable publishers like Bloomsbury and Penguin Random House.
OpenAI has responded by asking the Indian court to dismiss the plea brought forth by the book publishers. The company defends its ChatGPT service by asserting that it only disseminates information available in the public domain. According to OpenAI, the data utilized by ChatGPT is sourced from platforms such as Wikipedia or from abstracts, summaries, and tables of content that are publicly accessible on publishers' websites.
"Web-crawlers are designed to only access publically available data." – OpenAI
In its defense, OpenAI has highlighted that its servers are located outside India, raising questions about jurisdiction. The company argues that Indian judges lack the authority to adjudicate this matter. This jurisdictional issue is critical as it underscores the global nature of technology disputes in an increasingly interconnected world.
Pranav Gupta, secretary of the Federation of Indian Publishers, has countered OpenAI's assertions, claiming that much of the book-related content displayed by ChatGPT is scraped from websites that maintain licensing agreements with book publishers. This contention points to a broader concern regarding the use of copyrighted material by AI systems without proper authorization.
The case initially began with legal action initiated last year by local news agency ANI. It is part of a broader global trend where authors, news organizations, and musicians accuse technology firms of using copyrighted works to train AI services without permission or license. This ongoing legal battle could potentially set a precedent for how AI services operate within India's legal landscape.
Leave a Reply