Delhi HC denies ANI interim relief in copyright case against OpenAI

MUMBAI: The legal battle over AI and journalism has found its first plot twist—and, for now, the scales have tipped in OpenAI’s favour. The Delhi High Court has refused to grant interim relief to Asian News International (ANI) in its copyright lawsuit against OpenAI, holding that the company’s use of ANI’s published material to train ChatGPT does not, at this stage, amount to copyright infringement.

According to a Bar and Bench report, Justice Amit Bansal, in an interim order delivered on Friday, held that storing published material to train a Large Language Model (LLM) falls within the fair dealing exception under Section 52(1)(a) of the Copyright Act and, therefore, does not constitute infringement under Section 51.

The Court also found that responses generated by ChatGPT using its Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) process were not substantially similar to ANI’s original news reports. It observed that ANI had failed to demonstrate that ChatGPT had memorised or reproduced its copyrighted works while responding to user prompts.

Consequently, the Court declined to restrain OpenAI from using ANI’s published content at the interim stage.

Justice Bansal further observed that granting an interim injunction would cause irreparable harm not only to OpenAI but also to the larger public interest. The Court held that ANI had failed to establish a prima facie case and that the balance of convenience did not favour granting interim relief.

ANI filed the suit in 2024, becoming the first Indian media organisation to take legal action against OpenAI over alleged copyright infringement. The news agency argued that OpenAI had used its published reports without authorisation to train and operate ChatGPT and sought an injunction preventing the company from using its content.

The agency maintained that the public availability of its reports did not give OpenAI the right to copy or store them for AI training purposes.

OpenAI, however, argued that facts contained in news reports cannot be monopolised through copyright. It also submitted that publishers who do not wish their content to be accessed can opt to have their websites included in the company’s blocklist.

In November 2024, the High Court framed key issues for trial, including whether OpenAI’s storage of ANI’s content for AI training amounts to copyright infringement, whether AI-generated responses violate ANI’s copyright, whether such use qualifies as fair dealing under the Copyright Act, and whether Indian courts have jurisdiction despite OpenAI’s servers being located in the United States.

Given the significance of the issues, the Court appointed advocate Adarsh Ramanujan and Dr Arul George Scaria, Professor of Law at the National Law School of India University, as amici curiae to assist the proceedings.

Following multiple rounds of arguments and several intervention applications, the Court had reserved its interim order on 27 March before pronouncing its decision on Friday. While the ruling does not decide the final merits of the dispute, it marks a significant early victory for OpenAI in what is likely to become one of India’s most closely watched legal battles over artificial intelligence and copyright.