Intellectual Property Challenges In AI- Generated Works: A Doctrinal Analysis With Special Reference To Indian Law
- IJLLR Journal
- 5 days ago
- 3 min read
Ritika Singh, Amity Law School, Amity University, Noida.
Trapti Varshney, Amity Law School, Amity University, Noida.
ABSTRACT
The rapid evolution of generative artificial intelligence has introduced a profound doctrinal challenge to intellectual property law by destabilizing one of its most fundamental assumptions: that legal protection is premised upon identifiable human authorship. Traditional copyright frameworks, both in India and globally, have been constructed on the normative foundation that creative expression originates in human intellect and personality. However, contemporary AI systems particularly large language models and generative image tools are capable of producing outputs that display originality, coherence, and aesthetic value without direct human control over the final expressive form. This development raises critical questions regarding authorship, ownership, and the very justification for intellectual property protection.
This paper examines these issues with specific reference to Indian law, situating the analysis within a broader comparative framework. It focuses on the apparent tension between the statutory recognition of “computer- generated works” under Section 2(d)(vi) of the Copyright Act, 1957 and the judicial insistence on human creativity as the basis of originality, as articulated in decisions such as Eastern Book Company v. D.B. Modak. The paper argues that while the statutory language appears technologically accommodating, it does not necessarily support the recognition of purely autonomous AI-generated works when read in light of evolving judicial standards. Instead, Indian law implicitly requires a threshold of human intellectual contribution, which must be demonstrated through control over expressive elements rather than mere initiation of the generative process.
Beyond questions of authorship, the paper engages with the more immediate and practically significant challenges posed by AI systems, particularly in relation to training data and infringement. The large-scale ingestion of copyrighted material for training purposes raises complex issues under the doctrine of fair dealing, which remains comparatively narrow in Indian law. Unlike jurisdictions such as the United States and the European Union, which have developed more flexible or structured approaches to text-and- data mining, India lacks a clear legal framework governing the permissibility of such practices. As a result, ongoing and anticipated litigation is likely to play a pivotal role in shaping the contours of legality in this domain.
The paper also examines the role of trademark law as an emerging regulatory tool for addressing harms arising from AI-generated outputs, including the reproduction of protected marks and the risk of consumer confusion. It further considers the position of patent law, which remains relatively settled in its insistence on human inventorship, thereby excluding AI systems from being recognised as inventors.
Ultimately, the paper argues that the Indian legal system is at a transitional stage. While existing doctrines are capable of accommodating certain aspects of AI-assisted creativity, they are insufficient to address the full range of challenges posed by generative systems. The likely trajectory of reform lies not in the creation of entirely new intellectual property rights for AI- generated content, but in the development of a hybrid regulatory framework that combines doctrinal adaptation with policy interventions such as licensing mechanisms, transparency obligations, and clearer rules on liability. In this evolving landscape, the central task for Indian law will be to preserve the normative commitment to human creativity while ensuring that legal frameworks remain responsive to technological change.
Keywords: Artificial Intelligence, Intellectual Property, Copyright Authorship, Originality Doctrine, Computer-Generated Works, Fair Dealing, AI Training Data, Trademark Liability, Patent Inventorship, Indian Law.
