Intellectual Property and Artificial Intelligence (AI)

Copyrightability of AI-Generated Works

With the rise of AI-generated content, questions arise regarding authorship and copyright protection. Traditional copyright law is based on the principle of human creativity, making the protection of AI-created works a complex issue.

Current Position in India and Globally: Most jurisdictions, including India, require human authorship for copyright protection.
AI as a Tool: If AI is used as a tool under human direction, the human user can be deemed the author.
Fully Autonomous Works: Works generated without human input may not qualify for copyright protection under current law.

Example: An artist uses an AI tool to generate a music composition and releases it online.

Answer:

If the artist directed the AI with substantial creative input, they may be considered the author and can claim copyright.

Patentability of AI Inventions

AI can contribute to inventions or be the subject of inventions. Patent law, however, generally requires that the inventor be a natural person.

AI as an Inventor: Globally, there is debate about whether AI can be listed as an inventor. Most jurisdictions, including India, do not recognize AI as an inventor.
AI-Assisted Inventions: If a human uses AI to develop an invention, the human may be the rightful inventor.
Patent Subject Matter: AI-related technologies (e.g., neural networks, machine learning algorithms) are patentable if they meet novelty, inventive step, and industrial applicability.

Example: A researcher develops a new drug formula using an AI system that processes biological data.

Answer:

The researcher can file a patent application as the inventor, with AI considered a tool aiding in the invention process.

Ethical Considerations

IP laws surrounding AI raise ethical and legal concerns regarding authorship, accountability, and fairness.

Accountability: If AI infringes existing IP or generates defamatory or illegal content, determining liability becomes complex.
Bias and Fairness: AI tools may perpetuate biases present in training data, raising questions of ethical responsibility in IP protection.
Monopolization of AI-generated IP: Large corporations using AI at scale could dominate content or innovation fields, challenging equitable access.

Example: An AI generates visual art using datasets that include copyrighted images without permission.

Answer:

This raises ethical and legal concerns regarding copyright infringement and the responsibility of developers or users of the AI system.

Biotechnology and IP Protection

Patenting of Life Forms

Biotechnology has opened up new possibilities in the fields of agriculture, medicine, and environmental science. However, the patenting of life forms raises legal, ethical, and policy issues.

Microorganisms: Patents are generally allowed on genetically modified microorganisms, provided they meet patentability criteria—novelty, inventive step, and industrial applicability.
Higher Life Forms: The patentability of plants, animals, and human genes is controversial and restricted in many jurisdictions including India.
Indian Law: Under the Patents Act, 1970 (as amended), India excludes from patentability: “plants and animals in whole or any part thereof other than microorganisms.”
International Framework: TRIPS Agreement allows member states to exclude plants and animals but requires protection of microorganisms.

Example: A research firm engineers a new strain of bacteria that breaks down plastic waste.

Answer:

The new bacterial strain may be patentable in India as a microorganism if it meets patentability requirements.

Plant Variety Protection

Plant Variety Protection (PVP) offers an alternative to patents for safeguarding rights over new plant varieties. In India, this is governed by the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Act, 2001 (PPVFR Act).

Eligibility Criteria: A plant variety must be novel, distinct, uniform, and stable (NDUS) to be registered.
Rights of Breeders: Exclusive rights to produce, sell, market, distribute, import, or export the variety.
Farmers' Rights: Farmers can save, use, sow, re-sow, exchange, share, or sell their farm produce, including seeds of a protected variety (except branded seeds).
Benefit Sharing: Provisions for equitable sharing of benefits with farmers or communities contributing to the development of new varieties.

Example: A scientist develops a new drought-resistant wheat variety and seeks protection in India.

Answer:

The scientist can register the variety under the PPVFR Act if it meets the NDUS criteria and obtain exclusive breeder’s rights.

IP Enforcement Challenges in Digital Environment

Online Piracy

Online piracy refers to the unauthorized reproduction and distribution of copyrighted works such as movies, music, books, and software through the internet.

Common forms: Torrenting, illegal streaming platforms, file-sharing networks.
Challenges: Anonymity of users, fast dissemination of infringing content, global nature of the internet.
Impact: Loss of revenue to creators, disincentivizes innovation, undermines legal content distribution models.

Example: A website offers pirated versions of newly released films for free streaming.

Answer:

This constitutes copyright infringement and can be challenged through takedown notices, site-blocking orders, and criminal action.

Digital Rights Management (DRM)

DRM refers to technologies used by copyright holders to control access to and usage of their digital content.

Purpose: Prevent unauthorized copying, sharing, or modification of digital works.
Examples: Encryption, access codes, usage restrictions, and watermarking.
Legal Backing: Section 65A of the Copyright Act, 1957 penalizes circumvention of DRM measures in India.
Criticism: Over-restriction of legitimate user rights (e.g., fair use), interoperability issues.

Example: An eBook comes with DRM preventing it from being copied or printed.

Answer:

This is a lawful DRM practice that helps protect the author's copyright, though excessive restrictions may invite user backlash.

Challenges in Enforcing IP Across Jurisdictions Online

Enforcing IP rights on the internet involves multiple jurisdictions due to the global and decentralized nature of digital platforms.

Jurisdictional Complexity: Determining applicable law when infringer, server, and victim are in different countries.
Lack of Uniform IP Laws: Different countries have varied IP standards and enforcement procedures.
Practical Issues: Identification of anonymous infringers, cost of legal proceedings in foreign courts, and slow cooperation mechanisms.
Efforts: International cooperation through treaties (e.g., WIPO Internet Treaties) and mutual legal assistance treaties (MLATs).

Example: A software company in India discovers unauthorized use of its licensed tool by users in the U.S. via a foreign-hosted website.

Answer:

The company may face difficulties in identifying infringers and initiating action under foreign laws. International collaboration and strategic enforcement tools such as takedown requests are often necessary.