It was only a few weeks ago that the use of AI in song creation was being debated. Then came Eros Entertainment’s decision to re-release Raanjhana with an AI-altered ending without director Aanand L Rai‘s consent. This was the backdrop to our conversation with Priyanka Khimani, a lawyer specialising in intellectual property rights and contracts in entertainment and music. It is perhaps an indictment of how quickly AI-led content creation has moved that, in between the conversation happening and it getting published, an entire film created by AI has been announced, condemned, and defended.
How law looks at AI-modification of IP
From Anurag Kashyap and Vikramaditya Motwane to AR Rahman, many creators have raised concerns about the rampant use of AI in Indian entertainment, particularly in the absence of a legal framework governing it. Priyanka Khimani says that while there may be no ‘framework specific to AI’, the Indian constitution has ‘sufficient protection in the existing copyright statute that helps authors and rights holders enforce their rights.’
“Legal action has already been filed in certain courts to enforce copyright against AI platforms. Cease and Desist Letters and Take Down Notices are being addressed on a routine basis to curb unauthorised use in its tracks. That being said, the absence of a codified legal framework governing AI’s usage in creative domains does create somewhat of a vacuum,” she adds.
Artists tailoring contracts
She adds that Indian creators, be it in the world of music or storytelling, are now actively tailoring their contracts to pre-empt the use of their work by AI. “I have to say that there is a sharp increase in awareness about protecting one’s works amongst creators. We’ve observed a rise in clients requesting preemptive clauses to prevent the use of their IP in machine learning models and AI training datasets. Contracts are being negotiated more mindfully and with a forward-looking lens. Creators and their managers want to ensure they’re seeking the right counsel to protect their works and various other attributes of the creator’s personality. It doesn’t just stop at copyright. Name, image, likeness, voice are also being protected in equal parts,” she explains.
She adds that even as laws directly addressing infringement by AI may not be present in India, creators are seeking legal counsel on the matter. “An artist’s instinct to protect their originality is certainly catching up.”
Technology has democratised content creation. What required knowledge of editing software and availability of hardware a few years ago can easily be done through a few smart prompts to ChatGPT or MidJourney. “Democratisation of technology can be a double-edged sword,” agrees Priyanka.
“Traditional notions of authorship and originality are being challenged every day. How do you determine copyright when an AI programme generates a work by itself, with basic, unoriginal human prompts? How do you quantify infringement when AI mimics styles? These are no longer theoretical debates; these are issues that Indian creators and creators across the globe are facing presently,” she says, adding, “The law cannot afford to be static when creativity is in constant motion.”
The legal recourse
The announcement of Chiranjeevi Hanuman, an AI-created film has ruffled feathers in Indian cinema, with concerns raised about the regulation of such content. Aanand L Rai and Raanjhana’s entanglement also raised fears that creators may not be protected against the ‘misuse’ of their work by AI.
Priyanka informs that the question of copyright infringement by AI is being heard by an Indian court currently in a case in which OpenAI is a party. “In a significant move, the Indian Music Industry (IMI) filed an application to be an intervening party in the case. IMI has raised concerns that AI training methods could be violating the rights of music copyright holders,” she adds, “The outcome of this case could have a big impact on how Indian law handles the intersection of AI and copyright, especially in creative fields.”
