- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
OpenAI Objects To Delhi High Court’s Jurisdiction To Hear Copyright Suit By ANI
OpenAI Objects To Delhi High Court’s Jurisdiction To Hear Copyright Suit By ANI
The matter will be heard on 28 January
OpenAI, the artificial intelligence (AI) company and creator of ChatGPT has objected to the Delhi High Court’s jurisdiction to hear a copyright violation suit against it.
The Microsoft-backed tech giant reasoned that OpenAI was US-based, having no presence in India.
The company was responding to a suit by Indian news agency ANI demanding that all its data be removed from AI chatbot ChatGPT's training modules.
ANI had filed the suit against the tech firm last year. It alleged that OpenAI used the company's content without permission.
OpenAI submitted that complying with ANI's demand would violate its legal obligations in the US to preserve and not delete the training data. The company added that not having a permanent establishment in India, its servers were outside the country.
During a November hearing, OpenAI assured the court it would not use the content of the news agency. However, ANI complained that its published works were stored in ChatGPT's servers and must be deleted, as it used ANI's published content for training ChatGPT. It further accused OpenAI of attributing fabricated news stories to the publication.
ANI claimed that OpenAI "refused to obtain a lawful license or permission" to use its original works when entering license agreements with news firms like The Financial Times and Associated Press for using their copyrighted content.
The court had sought a detailed response from OpenAI on allegations that firm had halted its use of ANI content in future training for AI models.