LEGAL CHALLENGES OF AI-GENERATED CONTENT UNDER COPYRIGHT LAW: AN INDIAN PERSPECTIVE
LEGAL CHALLENGES OF AI-GENERATED CONTENT UNDER COPYRIGHT LAW: AN INDIAN PERSPECTIVE Sanya Singh, B.A. LLB. (H), 7th Semester, Student at Amity University Gurugram (India) Prerna Sihag, B.A. LLB. (H), 7th Semester, Student at Amity University Gurugram (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.215 Artificial intelligence has changed how creative content is made — and Indian copyright law simply Artificial intelligence has changed how creative content is made — and Indian copyright law simply has…

"Meeting with the Minister of Government Policy Coordination on Jan. 27" by Former UN Special Rapporteur on assembly & associa is licensed under CC BY 2.0. To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/.
By June 2026, generative models such as GPT-4, Stable Diffusion and Mid journey were described as capable of producing entire works independently, while India's Copyright Act of 1957 remained drafted for human creators and relatively silent on such output.
This matters because without clear rules on who owns AI output and whether training on copyrighted material was legal, Indian creators, platforms and users operate under uncertainty about infringement, licensing and enforceability, with no resolution offered in the excerpt.
- Indian Copyright Act of 1957 was drafted for human creators and is silent on AI-generated output.
- Systems named include GPT-4, Stable Diffusion, and Mid journey producing entire works independently.
- Core legal questions raised are who owns AI output and whether training on copyrighted data was legal.
- Authors are 7th semester B.A. LLB. (H) students at Amity University Gurugram, India.
In India, creators and users face unresolved copyright risk because the 1957 Act does not define ownership of AI-generated works or the legality of training on copyrighted data.
The rundown
The piece is authored by two 7th semester B.A. LLB. (H) students at Amity University Gurugram and published June 1, 2026 in LawFoyer International Journal of Doctrinal Legal Research.
It frames the issue around three named systems - GPT-4, Stable Diffusion, and Mid journey - as examples of tools that produce entire works independently, prompting questions about infringement during training.
Sources
- Peer-reviewedLawFoyer International Journal of Doctrinal Legal Research2026-06-01
How should this claim be treated?
ace
The debate