AI-Generated Content and Copyright Law in India: Who Owns What in 2026

The intersection of artificial intelligence and copyright law has become one of the most debated legal questions in India as generative AI tools produce text, images, music, and code at unprecedented scale. For businesses, content creators, and technology companies, the central question is straightforward but legally complex: who owns the copyright in content generated by AI, and what are the legal risks of using copyrighted material to train AI models? Indian law currently provides no definitive answer, but significant legal and policy developments in 2025 and 2026 are shaping the framework that will govern this space.

Under the Copyright Act, 1957, authorship is reserved for natural persons. Section 2(d) expressly identifies the author as a human being across all categories of works, whether literary, musical, artistic, or cinematographic. Since AI lacks legal personality and cannot hold rights or responsibilities, it cannot independently claim authorship or ownership over content it generates. The Indian government initially maintained that the existing intellectual property regime under the Copyright Act and the Patents Act is well-equipped to handle AI-related issues without creating a separate category of rights. However, the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT) published a Working Paper on Generative AI and Copyright in December 2025, marking India's first serious attempt to construct a regulatory framework for AI training on copyrighted works. The DPIIT paper proposes a hybrid licensing model that would create a statutory scheme for providing fair compensation to copyright holders while permitting AI companies blanket access to publicly available copyrighted material.

For businesses using generative AI, several practical legal risks must be managed now. First, any use of copyrighted material to train AI models without authorisation may attract infringement claims, as illustrated by the ongoing ANI v. OpenAI case in the Delhi High Court, where the news agency alleges unauthorised use of its content for training ChatGPT. Second, content generated by AI tools may inadvertently reproduce or substantially replicate copyrighted works, creating downstream liability for the company publishing such content. Third, unlike the European Union's AI Act, which provides creators with an opt-out right from AI training datasets, Indian copyright owners currently have no statutory right to prevent their works from being used in AI training. Businesses should maintain clear records of AI-generated content, conduct regular audits for potential infringement, and include robust indemnification clauses in AI vendor agreements.

The legal landscape is evolving rapidly. The DPIIT Working Paper is expected to lead to public consultations and potential legislative amendments in 2026. The outcome of ANI v. OpenAI will likely set a judicial precedent on whether scraping online content for AI training constitutes infringement under Indian law. The India AI Governance Guidelines issued by MeitY in November 2025 also emphasize content transparency and provenance tracking. Companies and creators should proactively engage with these developments and seek legal counsel to protect their intellectual property and manage compliance risks. Sansa Kanoon Pranali Partners provides advisory services on AI-related intellectual property matters, content licensing structures, and copyright compliance strategies.