Exclusive: Indian Copyright Office issues withdrawal notice to AI co-author
Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX
Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Exclusive: Indian Copyright Office issues withdrawal notice to AI co-author

Ankit Sahni

The withdrawal notice asked Ankit Sahni to inform the Copyright Office about the legal status of the AI tool Raghav Artificial Intelligence Painting App

The Indian Copyright Office has issued a notice of withdrawal to Ankit Sahni, the man who secured India's first-ever copyright registration recognising an artificial intelligence tool as the co-author of an artwork, it was revealed to Managing IP today.

The withdrawal notice, sent on November 25, asked Sahni to inform the Copyright Office about the legal status of the AI tool Raghav Artificial Intelligence Painting App, and invited his attention to Section 2(d)(iii) and Section 2(d)(vi) of the Copyright Act.

Section 2(d)(iii) sets out that the term ‘author’ in relation to an artistic work means an artist, and Section 2(d)(vi) states that the person who causes an artistic work to be created shall be its author.

Sahni responded to the notice on December 8 by stating that the Copyright Act did not contain any express provision for the registrar of copyright to review his own decision, unlike Section 127 of the Trade Marks Act and Section 77 of the Patents Act.

On top of that, there was no provision under the act that allowed the registrar to withdraw a copyright registration after its grant, Sahni argued.

“This is probably why the notice, notably, does not place reliance on any provision of the act,” Sahni told Managing IP.

Related stories

The artwork co-author said he also believed the registrar couldn’t withdraw the entire registration as the Copyright Act provided for the protection of computer-generated works.

As far as AI-authorship was concerned, he pointed out, the Copyright Act and the Copyright Rules didn’t define the term ‘person’ under Section 2(d)(vi), and the General Clauses Act defined the term in an inclusive manner to cover artificial and juristic persons.

The registrar’s only option now is to file a rectification petition before a high court under Section 50 of the Copyright Act, said Sahni.

He added: “But the Copyright Office is unlikely to approach the high court as prescribed under law.”

“If it does, that by itself, would be a first in more ways than one. I also do not expect the registrar to pass a speaking or reasoned order addressing the legal issues raised in our 17-page response.”

Sahni and his team will explore legal options once they receive a conclusive decision from the registrar.

He told Managing IP: “Our goal remains to keep the AI-authorship debate alive until the decision-makers reach a tangible policy or legislative change.”

 

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

In the first of a two-part UPC special, lawyers at A&O Shearman explain what you need to know about changes of procedural language and security for costs
Lawyers in the US and Europe reveal the work they focus on, how they stay one step ahead of creative counterfeiters, and why reputation matters
Abion said the appointment of Silvia Asioli and the launch of its Milan office will expand its market position in southern Europe
UK firms who have hired litigation and transactional lawyers reveal how they work together and the lessons have they learned
Jonah Mitchell tells us why he would have liked to have tried his hand at being a firefighter or chef
Noemi Parrotta, chair of the European subcommittee within INTA’s International Amicus Committee, explains why we might not have heard the last of the morality debate
Counsel say the USPTO's examples of AI patentability should make their lives easier and help point clients in the right direction
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Ehsun Forghany says he was impressed by the firm's focus on fashion and IP as well as the expertise of chairman Anthony Lupo
Counsel at medical device companies say the unitary patent, AI and terminal disclaimers are major areas of concern
Gift this article