'The interface between Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the Copyright Law is a complex and evolving area of legal analysis. AI has the potential to generate creative works, but the question remains as to whether such works can be considered original and therefore, are copyright protected.

With the advent of AI software applications such as Open AI's ChatGPT and Dall-E and so many more, the question of the protection of AI-generated works under the Copyright Act, 1957 in India has become even more imperative. Furthermore, in India, the Copyright Act, 1957, governs the protection of creative works, including those created with use of AI. However, the act does not unambiguously mention AI-generated works and elevates the questions about the liability of their creators and users in cases of infringing works.

Under the current framework, the definition of "author" as a natural person and the lack of explicit mention of AI-generated works in the act raise questions about the eligibility for copyright protection of these works. The definition of "author" under the act as a natural person may not be applicable in the context of AI-generated works, leaving the question of ownership unclear.

The applicability of the Copyright Act to AI-generated works is still a matter of discussion and requires further clarification. The rapid advancement of AI in the field of software development highlights the need for an inclusive review of the existing legal framework to address the challenges posed by AI and the copyright protection of AI-generated works in India.

Introduction
The unsettling reality about the copyright law in the age of Artificial Intelligence is that nobody knows what happens next. The AI software which creates digital art, music and code have gained immense popularity over the course of last year by learning from collections of works created by a myriad of artists. However, as these tools grow in popularity, unresolved legal issues could shape the future of the industry.

Artificial Intelligence refers to the simulation of human intelligence in machines that are programmed to learn from and make decisions based on data inputs. AI technology includes machine learning, natural language processing, neural network creation and computer vision, among others. The development of AI has the potential to revolutionize the way we live and work, nevertheless it raises important ethical and legal dilemmas, including but not limited to issues such as original work creation, bias, privacy, and accountability. With the increasing capability of AI to generate creative works, the question arises as to whether such work is eligible for copyright protection and how existing copyright laws apply to them.

In India, the Copyright Act, 1957 governs the protection of creative works and its applicability to AI-generated works is a topic of growing interest. It provides for the protection of original literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic content creation. However, the act does not explicitly mention AI-generated works. Under section 17 of the act defines a "work" as "literary, dramatic or musical work" and provides that the author of the work is the first owner of the copyright.

The copyright protection encourages the author to generate more imaginative works with the aid of his abilities, labour, and judgement. The recognition of AI as an author and the copyright protection of AI-generated works would put "human creativity" and "machine creativity" on the same pedestal. On the other hand, if copyright laws do not apply to AI-generated works, it would imply that human innovation is favoured to that of machines. Preferring machine creativity over human creativity or putting both at the same pedestal is likely to kill human creativity in the long run.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has gained considerable importance in contemporary times, as its use has become indispensable in most technological applications. AI has changed our lives and has engaged in various sectors such as health, transportation, aviation, space, education, entertainment industry such as music, games, art, films and others. In all countries, there has been a trend in automating most tasks and minimizing human intervention to ensure efficiency and eliminate errors.

Prof Stephen Hawking[1] once said that "the development of full artificial intelligence could spell the end of the human race". He further said that "it would take off on its own, and re-design itself at an ever-increasing rate" and "humans, who are limited by slow biological evolution, couldn't compete, and would be superseded".

The growing role of artificial intelligence in creativity and innovation is recognized around the world. Recently, Open AI, an AI lab in the United States, unveiled a new AI system called GPT-4, which spent several months "learning the ins and outs of natural language by reading thousands of e-books, length and width of Wikipedia and almost a trillion words posted on blogs, social networks and the rest of the internet, his own computer programs. The GPT-4[2] inter alia writes poetry, generates tweets, responds to trivia questions, summarizes emails, "translates languages and even writes its own computer programs"[3].

It helps in understanding the "vagaries of human language" and is competent in tackling other "human skills"[4]. The AI can write local newspaper articles, create artworks, write short novels, and create music by listening to various recordings. AI is also very useful in games.

Artificial intelligence has created serious copyright issues and challenges. This article discusses the importance of AI in generating artistic works such as literature, music, and poetry, digital art, etc. The article also addresses authorship issues and serious infringements in AI-created works.

Currently there are a lot of automated GPT tools available in the market. Some are open source and some are paid. Here are the top 5 most popular AI tools and the new challenges they bring to the world of copyright law.

1. Chat GPT

   ChatGPT is a large language model chatbot developed by an artificial intelligence organisation called OpenAI.
   
   In 2015, Elon Musk, Sam Altman, Greg Brockman, Ilya Sutskever, and Wojciech Zaremba created an artificial intelligence research group called OpenAI. Among various other services that OpenAI offers, ChatGPT was first released in 2018.
   
   The third model of the natural language processing project, GPT-3, laid the groundwork for ChatGPT. The technology software is a large-scale language model that has already been trained, and it leverages the GPT-3 architecture to sort through an immense pool of internet data and sources to construct its knowledge base. It has a remarkable ability to interact in conversational dialogue and responds in a way that can appear surprisingly human. It has recently been made available to the public as a free research peek. It will output text in any form, including prose, poetry, and even computer code, in response to text prompts such as questions or instructions. Along with language translation, summarization, text completion, question-answering, and even human diction, it has been optimized for a variety of language generating tasks.
   
   The recently released GPT-4 LLM expands further on the capabilities of its GPT-3 successor by adding support for processing images in addition to text. Although it still cannot output images, it can process and respond to any user generated visual inputs it receives. At its core, being able to do so means how an image can relate to language and our social understanding as well the context and artistic qualities associated with the input.
   
   This opens up increasingly better avenues of integration for the hearing and visually impaired. In a recent, popular use of this capability can be found in the mobile app Be My Eyes, the app could describe the objects around a user helping someone with low or no vision but with the integration of GPT-4 the app now has now transformed into somewhat of a "virtual volunteer" that generates a similar level of context and understanding of the user's surroundings as a human volunteer as claimed by ChatGPT creators OpenAI. GPT-4 is also more creative and has been educated on wider variety of topics, GPT-4 can now clear the bar exam, the SAT and the GRE for college graduates. This further opens up avenues of AI usage in academic tasks which would result in questions about copyright and ownership of research papers generated with the help of AI and related software.
   
   ChatGPT is a transformer-based neural network that provides responses and data with human writing patterns. Infinite amounts of text data have been used to train AI to comprehend context, relevancy and how to generate human-like responses to questions. ChatGPT learns how to follow instructions and provide responses that are conventional to humans using Reinforcement Learning with Human Feedback (RLHF), an additional training layer.
    

2. Dalle-E 2

   In January 2021, Open AI developed an AI model that can generate images from text by using a version of GPT-3 called DALL-E. Inspired by the Spanish artist as well as the robot animation movie Wall-E, the application was named Dall-e. In April 2022, OpenAI announced DALL-E 2, a successor model designed to generate more authentic images at higher resolutions that "can combine ideas, attributes, and styles" together. Both DALL-E and DALL-E 2 are deep transformer learning models used to generate digital images from natural language descriptions, called "prompts".
   
   This software has brought imagination into the ambit of fully-fledged AI. It does not only recognize individual images; it also considers the relationship between images. It is a neural network algorithm that generates accurate pictures from short phrases provided by the user. It comprehends language through inputs provided by the user in the form of textual descriptions and from "learning" information provided in its datasets by users and developers. It can imaginatively generate images based on words provided by the creators and artists, even in the case of the most unique and unusual descriptions.
   
   Dall-E generated images with different senses of nouns or with multiple senses at once or separating a word representing two different objects, clearly exposing the semantic leakage of properties between the entities. For example, for the prompt, 'a bat is flying over a baseball stadium', it generated an image with a wooden bat and a living bat flying across the baseball stadium. For a prompt like Goldfish, the output uploaded images with gold and fish as two distinct entities. The Dall-E art can sometimes go nuts with homonyms.
   
   Dall-E can produce images imitating different artists and artstyles. These images are sometimes generated using assets from or with the reference of works of other artists and stock images available online. This has created major controversy and provoked heated discussion of artistic ownership and if AI art can be copyrighted for commercial use or not.
    

3. DoNotPay

   Joshua Browder, a computer scientist from Stanford University, launched the business DoNotPay in 2015. The company developed the DoNotPay AI chatbot as a tool for legal services to assist consumers in resolving minor legal matters including late fees, fines and penalties, and traffic tickets. Since then, it has broadened its application, and today, according to its website, it may be used for a multitude of legal issues including filing restraining orders, annulling marriages and combating workplace discrimination.
   
   The company's mission is to help its clients, "combat corporations, beat bureaucracy and sue anyone at the press of a button." The DoNotPay AI has won 160,000 out of the 250,000 instances it has been deployed in as of 2023, for a success percentage of 64%.
   
   According to Browder, "The law is almost like code and language linked, so it's the impeccable use case for AI." DoNotPay's AI can help clients challenge traffic tickets in court via their mobile phones, delivering commands on when and what to say to ‌clients through headphones. While headphones are generally not permitted, the company has discovered a court that will accept them as a hearing aid.
   
   DoNotPay may also be employed in situations where a court appearance is not absolutely necessary. For instance, it may utilize machine learning to highlight key clauses in terms of service agreements so that clients are aware of how their data would be used. The AI can also make automated phone calls to banks or other customer service providers to cancel subscriptions or dispute any unauthorized transactions. If the situation worsens, you can utilize DoNotPay's complaint forms or small claims court forms to initiate a lawsuit.
   
   DpNotPay has recently come under scrutiny for not having a proper legal license however the laws around such a license for a software practicing law are murky at best. The AI still cannot handle drafting complex legal documentation with high degrees of accuracy and questions have been raised as to if AI companies are liable for errors in any software created documentation if the user faces problems in court.
    

4. Socratic

   Socratic is a learning app from Google that helps high school and university students in understanding their school work. It ties students to helpful educational content on the web and on sites like YouTube using Google's artificial intelligence (AI) and search technology.
   
   Socratic allows students to ask for assistance when they do. Even without teachers, tutors, or parents, students can still advance in their education.
   
   Students can ask for clarification on any subject using their voice or cameras, and Socratic will locate the best online resources. Socratic offers study materials that were prepared by academic experts, instructive films, and detailed explanations that teach students the important concepts for most academic subjects.
   
   Socratic encourages students to take charge of their education. Users select the concept they need assistance with, the resources they will use, and the learning approach that will be most effective for them.
   Socrates.ai is the first method that compiles all of your HR and benefits information into a single, streamlined hub. It is neither a bot toolkit or another point solution.
   
   AI in the world of education often relies on the use of licensed materials such as textbooks and question-banks. Ensuring that these licenses are obtained properly can be difficult, particularly as AI-powered tools become more widespread and complex. If an AI produces copyrightable material such as text books or scholarly articles, the question of the ownership of such works is also an ongoing debate.
    
5. Resemble AI
   Resemble AI works on generative deep learning voice technology that can generate custom synthetic voices from the provided data source and the neural text to speech engine can make it playback in various languages automatically. Recently, it was announced that it had developed Localize, a voice AI system that localises speech. In general, dubbed voices are used differently in each language by entertainment industries, ad agencies, call centers, and companies who need to translate voices. With the aid of this application, every character's voice may be reliably translated into several languages for use in audiobooks, corporate videos, video games, and other media.

For Instance, Morgan Freeman[5] 's voice will still sound like herself even if the documentary is dubbed into various other languages.

However, Resemble.ai asserts that user voices will carry into any language with Localize, i.e., the speaker's voice will still sound the same even when translated. Localize[6] will be compatible to function with video games, movies, call centres, company videos, and more as they are translated in and out of languages which include English, French, German, Dutch, Italian, and Spanish, with future plans to add Localize for Korean, Japanese and Mandarin.

The capacity of Resemble AI to imbue your custom-built voice with vocal traits and emotions is what distinguishes it from other artificial intelligence systems. As a result, whether a user is developing a game or making an advertisement, it may offer flexibility to support a variety of applications. According to Resemble.ai, voices may be replicated at scale in seconds as opposed to weeks. For 65,000 users, it has replicated 42,000 voices using a process that was previously time-consuming and expensive. Among the users are two of the biggest global telecoms, two of the biggest consulting firms, a leading global broadcaster, two of the biggest entertainment conglomerates, one of the biggest toy manufacturers, and the pioneer in airport communications systems.

Resemble.ai and other such voice emulation and neural text to speech platforms raise interesting questions about artistic ownership and its limitations and also interesting legal dilemmas such as what is the extent to which an artist owns their voice in comparison to what their label or studio owns in terms of finished music product.

If a label uses an artist's voice samples and AI tools to emulate the artist's voice and use it in a song with original music and production, in such a hypothetical scenario who would own the copyright to the song? Would the artist be entitled to any royalties based on the likeness and usage of their voice? Labels can argue that AI generated voices are not bound by typical copyright laws and that likeness to someone's voice does not mean that the person is entitled to royalties since they had no part in the creation of the work. This is an ongoing matter of concern that is currently being worked on by lawmakers around the world.

Artificial Intelligence And Copyright

"The rise of the machines is here, but they do not come as conquerors, they come as creators."[7]

Artificial intelligence (AI) is becoming increasingly prevalent in today's world, with applications ranging from self-driving cars to intelligent virtual assistants. One area where AI is having a significant impact is in the creation of new works of art, music, and literature. The traditional concept of copyright is based on the idea that a work is created by a human author and is therefore eligible for protection under copyright law. But AI can now create original works that are indistinguishable from those created by human beings.

AI has the ability to generate a considerable amount of data quickly and efficiently with minimal investment. Due to their originality, the works produced by AI might be eligible for copyright protection in all relevant jurisdictions. The "programming and parameter on which such AI actually compiles and develops the work"[8] may be regarded to have satisfied the requisite of "skill and judgement" in originality. But, in the case of work produced by AI, there won't be an author. There is human involvement in AI-assisted works. Hence, in the latter context, the person who used artificial intelligence to generate the work may claim himself to be the author, but the contrary is not true where the content has been generated by AI itself without any human interference. The rising concern of the issue of authorship in such scenarios has left the whole world puzzled.

The copyright protection serves as an incentive for the author to generate more imaginative work with the aid of his expertise, labour, and judgement. If AI is considered as an author of the AI-generated work, it could cause several issues. The work generated by AI may not be flawless, AI may use derogatory or obscene language, encourage conflict along racial, ethnic, or religious lines, or result in any other unintended outcome. Due to AI's lack of legal recognition as a person, it will be challenging to determine its civil and criminal liability in this situation. Even if such material is destroyed or, in the worst-case scenario, AI software is outlawed, it might already be too late and the harm may already be irreparable.

Another concern is how AI will be prosecuted for infringement in the event that the AI-generated work is "substantially similar" to an already-existing work that might be under copyright protection. In addition to that, AI will not be able to transfer ownership of the work in absence of personhood even if it is considered as an author. The notion which was derived from civil law nations like Germany, France, and Spain indicates that the "imprint of the author's personality" must be present in a work's creation. Thus, the authorship should be denied to AI in the AI-generated works as AI does not have a personality of its own.

Nonetheless, it won't be out of place to highlight that the European Parliament has advocated for granting "autonomous robots" the legal character of "electronic persons"[9] in order to protect them under copyright law. It may also be mentioned that the "music composing AI from Artificial Intelligence Virtual Artist (AIVA) Technologies becomes the first in the world to be formally accorded the status of a composer".

It has been authorized as an official composer by "SACEM, France and Luxembourg author's right society" to produce music and collect royalties under the name AIVA. It is also remarkable that Sophia, an AI humanoid robot, was given citizenship by Saudi Arabia in 2017. The creator of Sophia, Dr. David Hanson, asserts in his paper "Entering the Era of Living Intelligence Systems and Android Society" that, given the advancement of AI, there will eventually come a tipping point where robots will awaken and demand their rights to exist, to live freely, and to evolve to their full potential.

Additionally, it indicates that they will be requesting intellectual property protection for any new intellectual property rights (hence referred to as "IPRs") they develop. He predicted that by 2045, "advanced robots will have the ability to vote in general elections, own land, and get married"[10].

A right of integrity is typically granted to the author, ensuring the author's right to be identified with his or her work and acknowledged as its creator. It allows the author to claim damages for any mutilation or distortion of the work if it harms his or her honour or reputation.

The Delhi High Court stated in Amar Nath Sehgal v. Union of India that:
"in the material world, laws are geared to protect the right to equitable remuneration. But life is beyond the material. It is temporal as well. Many of us believe in the soul. Moral rights of the author are the soul of his works. The author has a right to preserve, protect and nurture his creations through his moral rights"[11]. Feelings and emotions are the moral rights of humans and they are not meant for AI.

What is meant by the term "AI-generated works" will be another confusing issue. The AI does not die like how a person does. Yet, according to the rules of the various countries, one may argue that the term could be measured from the date of publication to a period of 50 or 60 years in the future.

The idea that copyright protection should be granted to AI with regard to works produced by AI is contested on the grounds that humans are mortal and get tired while working. Hence, a human author only produces a finite number of works over his or her lifetime, and the copyright is justifiable since the author deserves to be compensated for their labour.

An AI, on the other hand, is fatigue-free, immortal, and able to create an infinite number of works. It is "equivocal and disputable" to provide AI-generated works copyright protection. Furthermore, the experts who oppose copyright protection for AI-generated works assert that the AI will always generate the same results if provided with the same model and inputs. As a result, it is difficult to describe it as "original and inventive".
Another viewpoint that comes out of the discussion is that there shouldn't be any authorship in AI-generated work, and that the work produced in this way should belong to the "public domain." There are several justifications for making AI-generated artwork available to the public.

One of the grounds is that since an AI-generated work incurs no costs during production, making it freely available to the general public makes perfect sense. Second, AI is able to produce as many iterations of its own work as needed without using additional resources or money.

Last but not least, one of the objectives of copyright law is to encourage the creator of the work to provide economic rights and moral rights to boost the morale to produce more work for the advancement of the society.
As AI is not human, it does not need such inspiration to create art.

However, one should also take into account the possibility that if AI-generated works are not protected and the public is allowed to use them without restriction or payment of a fee, it could lead to a catastrophe for the businesses that have made significant investments in the AI systems that produce these works.

Intelligent people will begin commercialising such works in numerous ways without spending any money, competing with businesses that have made the investment. Hence, in order to motivate AI programmers and firms to continue investing in the field, some protection for AI-generated works may be necessary.

Artificial Intelligence And Data Protection

Significant improvements in the production, dissemination, and consumption of artistic works have been made possible by artificial intelligence (AI). Yet, the evolution of AI-generated works has brought up difficult ethical and legal issues related to liability, ownership, and copyright law. One of the primary challenges presented by the interaction between AI and copyright law is the protection of AI-generated works under copyright law and the identification of the owner of such works.

Legal professionals, regulators, and business stakeholders are attempting to create a legal framework that tackles these issues while balancing the interests of original work creators, users, and owners. As a result, there is growing concern among these groups.

Artificial intelligence has the potential to significantly improve our lives by automating repetitive chores, making predictions, and supporting decision-making processes. AI is extremely dependent on data to train and improve its algorithms but as the usage of AI grows, questions about data security have also surfaced. Since AI systems rely largely on data to operate, personal data is frequently gathered, processed, and analysed during this process. This prompts concerns about the security of personal information and possible safeguards for data privacy.

The collection and processing of personal data is one of the major issues with AI and data privacy. For AI algorithms to be trained and become more accurate, a lot of data is needed. However, the usage of personal information can significantly compromise both security and privacy. Misuse of personal information can lead to financial fraud, identity theft, and other types of cybercrime. Thus, it is crucial to guarantee that personal data is gathered and managed in a legal, impartial, and transparent way.

The problem of explain ability is another difficulty brought on by AI and data protection. AI systems frequently process data and make decisions using complicated algorithms, which can be challenging to explain or comprehend. Individuals may find it challenging to exercise their rights under data protection legislation and to comprehend how their personal data is being handled due to this lack of transparency.

The possibility for bias and discrimination in AI systems is another problem. The quality of AI systems depends on the data they are trained on. An artificial intelligence system will be prejudiced or discriminatory if the data used to train it is. This could lead to unfair and biased outcomes which may have a big impact on individuals and society as a whole.

In order to protect personal data, legislation like the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) provide individuals more control over their data and impose requirements on the businesses that gather and process it. The use of AI, however, makes issues more complicated because it is frequently challenging to forecast how AI systems will handle personal data and whether they will adhere to data protection rules.

To address these challenges, regulators and industry stakeholders are working to develop guidelines and best practices for the use of AI in data protection. For example, the European Union's High-Level Expert Group on AI has developed a set of ethics guidelines for trustworthy AI, which includes principles such as transparency, accountability, and non-discrimination. Similarly, the World Economic Forum has developed a set of guidelines for the responsible use of AI in financial services.

In essence, AI offers both opportunities and challenges for data protection. It's critical to create a balance between the advantages of AI and the requirement to protect personal information and privacy.
Data protection laws must evolve to keep up with these changes as AI becomes more ubiquitous to ensure the security of personal data. The use of AI creates complicated legal and ethical issues; thus, it is essential that regulators and industry stakeholders unite to create a legislative framework that strikes a balance between the advantages of AI and the requirement to preserve individual privacy rights.

This necessitates that corporations utilise AI responsibly and ethically and abide by all applicable data protection laws and regulations. By doing this, we can make sure that AI is applied ethically and responsibly for the good of society as a whole.

Conclusion:
The intersection of AI and copyright law in India is a complex and evolving area that requires close attention from policymakers, legal experts, and industry stakeholders. One of the primary concerns with AI and copyright law in India pertains to how to protect AI-generated works under the Copyright Act of 1957 and how to hold the creators and consumers of AI systems accountable for infringements of other people's intellectual property.

In order to address these issues and create a framework that strikes a balance between the protection of the rights of authors and owners of original works and the rights of creators and users of AI-generated works, a comprehensive review of the current legal framework as well as increased awareness and education on the ethical and legal implications of AI and copyright law are essential. AI will play an increasingly significant part in all facets of our daily life.

Its usage must be regulated by legislation. AI will continue to play a critical role in intellectual property rights, especially in copyright. The international community has been compelled to consider these questions of authorship and ownership of AI-generated works in copyright law and come up with an agreeable answer for all nations. To solve this problem, no rule is perfect, and each one has drawbacks of its own. Giving non-human authors credit for AI-generated works will have a big impact. It's also not a smart idea to make AI-generated works available to the public because it will deter AI programmers and businesses from creating them.

End Notes:

1. Rory Cellan-Jones, "Stephen Hawking warns artificial intelligence could end mankind", BBC News, December 2, 2014, available at: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-30290540 (last visited on January 23, 2021).
2. Cade Metz, "Meet GPT-3. It Has Learned to Code (and Blog and Argue)", The New York Times, November 24, 2020, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/24/science/artificial-intelligence-ai-gpt3.html
3. Ibid
4. Andres Guadamuz, "Artificial Intelligence and Copyright", WIPO Magazine, October 2017
5. https://www.resemble.ai/how-ai-enables-voices-in-multiple-languages/
6. https://multilingual.com/resemble-ai-ai-tech-user-voice/
7. By Andres Guadamuz, Senior Lecturer in Intellectual Property Law, University of Sussex, United Kingdom, WIPO magazine, October 2017
8. Lucy Rana and Meril Mathew Joy, "India: Artificial Intelligence and Copyright – The Authorship", Mondaq, December 18, 2019, https://www.mondaq.com/india/copyright/876800/artificial-intelligence-andcopyright-the-authorship
9. Edward Klaris and Alexia Bedat, "Copyright Laws and Artificial Intelligence", American Bar Association, November 16, 2017, https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/publications/youraba/2017/december-2017/copyright-laws-andartificial-intelligence/
10. Anthony Cuthbertson, "Robots will have Civil Rights by 2045, Claims Creator of 'I will Destroy Humans' Android", Independent UK, May 25, 2018, https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-andtech/news/robots-civil-rights-android-artificial-intelligence-2045-destroy-humans-sophia-singularity-a8367331.html
11. 2005 (30) PTC 253 (Del).