Delhi High Court Holds OpenAI’s Training on Copyrighted Works Falls Under Fair Dealing
The Delhi High Court has held that OpenAI’s training of its large language models on original retrieved copyrighted works amounts to fair dealing and does not constitute copyright infringement. ANI Media Pvt Ltd had approached the court in 2024 against OpenAI Inc and OpenAI OpCo LLC, alleging infringement of its copyrighted material in connection with LLM training. Justice Amit Bansal observed that OpenAI’s act of storing ANI’s original retrieved works for training the models underlying ChatGPT falls within Section 52(1)(a) of the Copyright Act and therefore does not amount to infringement.
The court also noted, on a prima facie basis, that outputs generated by ChatGPT using the RAG technique did not amount to infringement, since they were not substantially similar to ANI’s inputs. The Court further held that ANI had failed to establish any memorisation or regurgitation of its works through ChatGPT responses, and concluded that ANI had not made out a prima facie case for interim injunction. The Court therefore found that the balance of convenience lay in OpenAI’s favour, observing that an interim injunction would cause irreparable injury not only to OpenAI but also to the public at large.
Case Title: Ani Media Pvt. Ltd. v. Open Ai Opco LLC
Citation: I.A. 45300/2024 in CS(COMM) 1028/2024, I.A. 45301/2024 & I.A.26192/2025
Read more about it here and judgement here.
Meta Assures Delhi High Court It Will Reverse Two Copyright Strikes Against TV Today Posts
Meta Platforms has told the Delhi High Court that it will reverse two copyright strikes issued against social media posts of TV Today Network Limited after the broadcaster challenged what it described as false copyright claims made by anonymous accounts. Appearing for Meta, Advocate Varun Pathak said the company would “reverse strike and give BSI,” and the High Court recorded the undertaking while directing that the two copyright strikes be reversed within a maximum period of one month.
The court also directed Meta to provide TV Today with the Basic Subscriber Information and IP logs relating to the anonymous accounts within two weeks. TV Today has filed a suit seeking ₹2 crore in damages, alleging that anonymous users issued false copyright strikes against its content, caused harm to its business and reputation, and attempted extortion through abuse of Meta’s copyright enforcement mechanism. The matter has been listed for further hearing on August 18.
You can read more about it here.
Delhi High Court Directs Meta to Take Down Infringing Zee Content from Various Facebook Pages
The Delhi High Court has directed Meta Platforms Inc. to take down infringing content uploaded by operators of 14 Facebook pages carrying Zee Entertainment Enterprises’ television serials and web series. While passing an ad-interim order, the Court declined to direct blocking of the Facebook accounts themselves. Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani passed the order in a suit filed by Zee against Meta and 18 other defendants, in which Zee sought permanent, mandatory and dynamic injunctions restraining infringement of its copyright and broadcast reproduction rights, along with damages, rendition of accounts, disclosure, delivery-up and other consequential reliefs. Zee alleged that operators of several Facebook pages were uploading its content and disseminating it on a real-time and continuing basis through multiple log-in accounts and pages, and that the pages were monetising the content through advertisements.
The court held that Zee had made out a prima facie case, that the balance of convenience lay in its favour, and that irreparable loss and injury would be caused if interim relief was not granted. Accordingly, the court granted an ad-interim injunction against Meta and the Facebook page operators, while directing Meta to take down the content with the listed URLs. The matter has been listed before the Joint Registrar on October 15, 2026, for completion of pleadings.
Case Title: Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited v. Meta Platforms Inc. & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 729/2026
You can read more about it here.
Madras High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Man Accused in Leak of Jana Nayagan
The Madras High Court has granted anticipatory bail to a man accused of pirating and releasing Tamil Nadu Chief Minister C. Joseph Vijay, aka Thalapathy’s movie Jana Nayagan on online platforms before its theatrical release. Justice C. Kumarappan held that custody of the accused was not required, since the police had already filed the final report in the matter. The court observed that the initial allegation against the petitioner was only that he had viewed the illegally released movie, and that no serious overt act had been attributed to him. It further noted that bail had already been granted to other accused in the same incident, that the petitioner had cooperated with the investigation, and that he had initially not been treated as an accused. The court also noted that he had assisted the investigation by standing as an attesting witness at the time of another accused’s arrest, and held that the possibility of him absconding or tampering with witnesses was not acceptable. Accordingly, the court granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions.
Case Title: Pradeep Kumar & Ors vs The State & Anr
Citation: W.P.(CRL) 597/2026
You can read more about it here.
US Judge Approves Anthropic’s $1.5 Billion Copyright Settlement with Authors
A federal judge in San Francisco has approved Anthropic’s $1.5 billion settlement in a class action brought by authors who alleged the company used their books without permission to train its AI chatbot, Claude. U.S. District Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin granted final approval of the deal, which is described as the largest known settlement in a U.S. copyright case, and rejected claims that the amount was too low.
The case is among several copyright actions filed against technology companies over large language model training, and it is the first major U.S. case of this kind to settle. Judge Martinez-Olguin also overruled objections to the settlement, while some authors and publishers who opted out have continued with separate lawsuits against Anthropic.
You can read more about it here.
Centre Says New Broadcasting Rules Will Create Unified Framework, Allow Voluntary Migration for Existing Licence Holders
The Centre on Wednesday said that its proposed Telecommunications (Television, Radio and Associated Services) Rules, 2026 are intended to establish a unified regulatory framework for India’s broadcasting sector, while assuring existing licence holders that they may voluntarily migrate to the new authorisation regime. The clarification from Information and Broadcasting Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw came days after the Ministry released the draft rules for public consultation and marked the government’s first detailed explanation in Parliament of how the new framework will replace the present patchwork of broadcasting guidelines under the Telecommunications Act, 2023. The proposed framework brings together six separate sets of guidelines covering satellite television uplinking and downlinking, Direct-to-Home services, Headend-in-the-Sky platforms, private FM radio, community radio stations, and Internet Protocol Television services. Vaishnaw further clarified that existing broadcasters and service providers will not be required to shift immediately to the new regime, and may either move to the new authorisation framework or continue under their existing licences until they choose to migrate.
You can read more about it here.
Sony Music Sues Udio Again Over Alleged Copying of More Than 30,000 Songs for AI Training
Sony Music Entertainment has filed a fresh lawsuit against AI music generator Udio, alleging that the startup illegally copied more than 30,000 songs by artists including Beyoncé, Harry Styles, and Elvis Presley to train its models. Sony had earlier sued Udio and its competitor Suno in June 2024, along with Universal Music Group and Warner Music Group. In the new complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, Sony said discovery in the case showed that 30,117 tracks were found in Udio’s training datasets.
The label said it filed the new action after U.S. District Court Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein denied its request to add those tracks to the original suit. Sony argued that copying protected sound recordings for a commercial AI product requires permission from rightsholders, while Udio has maintained that its training was fair use. Sony also stated that Udio could have licensed the tracks instead of allegedly taking them from YouTube, and it is seeking at least $150,000 per work allegedly infringed, along with an order blocking Udio from using its works to train its models.
You can read more about it here.
US Musicians Union Opposes Universal and Warner Bid to Dismiss Lawsuit Over Suno and Udio AI Deals
The American Federation of Musicians has asked a New York federal court to allow its lawsuit against Universal Music Group and Warner Music Group to proceed, opposing the labels’ effort to dismiss the case concerning their AI licensing deals with Suno and Udio. The union argues that those deals triggered the “new use” provision under Article 21(a) of the Sound Recording Labor Agreement, which it says requires the labels to compensate members whose recordings were licensed to the AI companies.
According to the AFM, the provision creates an independent payment obligation and applies to all new uses, while the labels contend it is only a rate conversion provision and does not itself create payment rights where no AFM agreement covers AI licensing. The union also opposed the majors’ request to pause discovery and said it would amend its complaint to name Warner Records, Inc. instead of Warner Music Group Corp. The AFM filed its lawsuit on June 5 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, alleging that Universal and Warner breached the SRLA by licensing members’ recordings to Suno and Udio without compensation or credit.
Read more about it here.
