ANI Takes Legal Action Against OpenAI: Accuses ChatGPT of Copyright Infringement Over News Content

Delhi High Court, March 18, 2025 — In a significant legal development, news agency Asian News International (ANI) has filed a lawsuit against OpenAI, the developer of ChatGPT, accusing the company of infringing its copyright. The case, ANI Media Pvt Ltd v. OpenAI Inc & Anr, was heard by Justice Amit Bansal of the Delhi High Court on Tuesday. ANI has alleged that OpenAI has been scraping not only content from ANI’s own website but also material shared with ANI's subscribers, thereby violating its intellectual property rights.

Allegations of Unauthorized Use of Copyrighted Content

During the hearing, ANI's counsel, Advocate Sidhant Kumar, presented evidence suggesting that OpenAI had accessed and used ANI’s copyrighted content in its training processes for ChatGPT. The counsel specifically referenced instances where ANI’s content was not only extracted directly from its website but also sourced from ANI’s subscribers. ANI maintains that licensing content to subscribers does not relinquish its control over the intellectual property, emphasizing that the specific manner in which facts are reported carries copyright protection.

Kumar argued, "While facts themselves cannot be copyrighted, the unique expression of those facts—such as the style and context in which they are narrated—holds copyright protection. I do not cease to retain control over my content merely because it has been licensed for use by a subscriber."

OpenAI’s Response: Fair Use and Licensing Agreements

In defense, Senior Advocate Amit Sibal, representing OpenAI, countered that factual reporting by different media outlets often results in similarities due to the commonality of the facts being reported. He argued that such similarities, inherent in reporting, do not constitute copyright infringement. Sibal further clarified that ChatGPT does not reproduce content verbatim but instead generates summaries of publicly available data, rephrased in its own words, and directs users to the original sources.

Sibal also stated that OpenAI had licensing agreements with other major media outlets, such as the Financial Times, allowing them to reproduce content for summarization. He questioned ANI’s position, asserting that ANI is not a newspaper but a content aggregator, which does not inherently own the rights to the articles and interviews it compiles. Sibal emphasized that OpenAI has secured permission to use content from its partners, making the use of ANI’s data in ChatGPT distinct from those agreements.

Copyright Infringement Claims and Legal Issues

ANI's lawsuit asserts that OpenAI is using its copyrighted material for commercial gain, specifically in the development and operation of ChatGPT. The case centers on the following key legal issues:

1. Storage and Use of Data for AI Training: Whether OpenAI’s storage of ANI’s data for the purpose of training ChatGPT constitutes copyright infringement.

2. Use of Copyrighted Data in User Responses: Whether the generation of responses using ANI’s copyrighted data by ChatGPT constitutes an infringement.

3. Fair Use Defense: Whether OpenAI’s use of ANI’s content qualifies as "fair use" under Section 52 of the Copyright Act, 1957, which provides certain exceptions for the use of copyrighted material.

4. Jurisdictional Issue: Whether Indian courts have jurisdiction to hear the case, given that OpenAI’s servers are located in the United States.

The matter is set for further hearings on March 28, 2025, with the Delhi High Court deliberating on these critical issues. In November 2024, the Court had issued summons to OpenAI in response to ANI's claim.

Conclusion

The case represents a broader legal debate surrounding the use of copyrighted material for training artificial intelligence systems. As AI technologies like ChatGPT become increasingly prevalent, the legal landscape surrounding intellectual property rights and their application in AI development continues to evolve. This case may have significant implications for the way AI companies use data sourced from third-party content providers. The outcome of this lawsuit could set a precedent for future disputes involving copyright and AI training practices.

The Court has also appointed Advocates Adarsh Ramanujan and Dr. Arul George Scaria as amici curiae to assist with the legal complexities of the case. The next hearing is anticipated to clarify these contentious issues further.