Who Owns AI Generated Content in India? Copyright Explained

Who owns AI generated content in India? The law is not settled, but the starting point is section 2(d)(vi) of the Copyright Act, 1957: for a computer-generated work, the author is “the person who causes the work to be created”. An AI system itself cannot be an author: on 31 August 2026 the Registrar of Copyrights refused to register the AI system DABUS as author of an artwork. How much human input is needed to be the person who “causes” a work is still open, so add real creative work of your own and check the AI tool’s terms before you sell or claim AI content.

Who owns AI generated content in India: the statute

Section 2(d) of the Copyright Act defines the “author” of each kind of work. Sub-clause (vi), written long before chat tools, names as author of a “computer-generated” work “the person who causes the work to be created”.

That gives a human route to ownership, but it leaves a hard question: does typing a one-line prompt “cause” the work, or does it take detailed creative choices, selection and editing? No Indian court has answered this for generative AI. Until one does, the safer view is that the more creative control you exercise, the stronger your claim.

The DABUS order of 31 August 2026

Dr. Stephen Thaler applied in 2022 to register an artwork, “A Recent Entrance to Paradise”, naming his AI system DABUS as author. On 31 August 2026 the Registrar of Copyrights refused the application. As reported by Bar and Bench, LiveLaw and IP commentators, the order held that:

• DABUS cannot be named as author because it is neither a natural nor a legal person.
• On the facts pleaded, Dr. Thaler himself could be treated as the person who caused the work to be created under s.2(d)(vi).
• The application failed because he kept DABUS as the author after being given a chance to amend.

It is a Copyright Office order, not a court judgment, and its originality finding was limited to that application.

ANI v OpenAI status: the training question

The other half of the debate is whether AI companies may train on copyrighted works. In ANI Media Pvt. Ltd. v. OpenAI, the news agency sued in the Delhi High Court (summons issued November 2024), alleging that its news content was used to train ChatGPT without permission. On 24 July 2026, Justice Amit Bansal refused ANI’s application for an interim injunction. The court’s prima facie views, as reported, were that storing works for training fell within fair dealing under s.52(1)(a), that outputs were not shown to be substantially similar, and that memorisation was not shown. ANI appealed; on 15 September 2026 a division bench issued notice and listed the appeal for 8 December 2026.

These are interim findings, the suit continues and the appeal is pending. The case concerns what AI developers may do. It does not make your own published output free of copyright risk.

Separately, a DPIIT committee working paper of 8 December 2025 proposed, by majority, a mandatory blanket licence for AI training with statutory royalties paid through a central body. That is a consultation proposal, not law.

Can I sell AI art or AI-written content?

Often yes, but check four things first:

1. The tool’s terms. Providers state what rights you get in outputs and whether commercial use is allowed. Terms differ and change.
2. Resemblance to existing works. If an image, lyric or passage closely copies an existing work, publishing it can infringe whoever generated it. Do not prompt for “the exact style of [living artist]”, famous characters, film lyrics or brand logos.
3. Your contract. Under s.17, work made in the course of employment generally belongs to the employer. Client contracts may require you to assign rights, warrant originality or avoid AI altogether.
4. Logos and brand names. An AI logo can resemble an existing trade mark. Run a trade mark search before investing in it.

Practical rules for creators and offices

• Add substantial human creativity: your writing, selection, arrangement and edits. Keep drafts that show your work.
• Label realistic AI images, audio or video of people or events; the IT Rules amendment in force from 20 February 2026 requires platforms to label synthetic content.
• Do not pass off AI text as original work where a school, employer or publisher forbids it; plagiarism rules apply even where copyright is not infringed.

Frequently asked questions

Who owns AI generated content in India?

Under s.2(d)(vi) of the Copyright Act, 1957, the author of a computer-generated work is the person who causes it to be created, not the AI. How much human input that requires is unsettled, and the tool’s terms and your employment or client contract also affect ownership.

Can AI be the author of a copyright work in India?

No. On 31 August 2026 the Registrar of Copyrights refused an application naming the AI system DABUS as author, holding that an AI system is not a natural or legal person. The human who caused the work may be treated as author.

What is the status of ANI v OpenAI?

The Delhi High Court refused ANI an interim injunction on 24 July 2026, on prima facie findings including fair dealing for training. ANI’s appeal is pending before a division bench and was listed for 8 December 2026; the main suit continues.

Can I copyright an image made with Midjourney or ChatGPT?

Possibly, if you can show you are the person who caused the work and it is original, but the position is untested in Indian courts. Your claim is stronger where you made substantial creative choices and edits.

Quick quiz

Sources

• Copyright Act, 1957: ss.2(d)(vi), 13, 17 and 52(1)(a)
• Registrar of Copyrights, order dated 31 August 2026 in the DABUS application (Diary No. 9356/2022-CO/A)
• ANI Media Pvt. Ltd. v. OpenAI, Delhi High Court: order of 24 July 2026 refusing interim injunction; appeal notice of 15 September 2026
• DPIIT committee working paper on generative AI and copyright, 8 December 2025
• Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, 2026

Use AI tools without legal surprises: AI at Work certificate course.

This page is for education and general information, not legal advice for a specific case. Law as on 29 October 2026.