The Delhi High Court issued a notice to OpenAI on Tuesday regarding an appeal filed by news agency Asian News International (ANI). According to multiple media reports, a division bench of Justices Avneesh Jhingan and Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora heard arguments from senior counsel Sidhant Kumar, representing ANI. The court asked OpenAI to file its response and scheduled the next hearing for December 5, 2026. As per Business Standard, the Division Bench directed OpenAI to respond to ANI's appeal and listed the matter for further hearing on December 5. This represents a slight adjustment from the previously scheduled December 8 hearing date.
During the proceedings, Kumar told the court that OpenAI had previously undertaken not to scrape or download content from ANI's website as an interim arrangement. As reported by Mint, Kumar argued that "From 11 September 2024 till the passing of the impugned order, a certain status was obtained, which was that they were not downloading or scraping content from my website. That statement was made. They volunteered that they will not take news content from my website." The court declined to pass an order without hearing OpenAI's response, with the bench indicating it is not inclined to issue any directions to OpenAI about this arrangement today, without first hearing its response.
ANI sued OpenAI in November 2024, alleging that ChatGPT was trained on its copyrighted news content without a license. According to Mint, the agency also alleged that the chatbot generated responses reproducing or drawing on ANI's work, including fabricated content falsely attributed to the agency. The legal dispute centers on whether OpenAI's use of ANI's content falls under the "fair dealing" exception under the Copyright Act or constitutes copyright infringement. In its suit filed in 2024, ANI sought an injunction against OpenAI from storing, publishing, reproducing or using its copyrighted content. As reported by Business Standard, the agency has now challenged the single judge's order denying interim relief, arguing that Indian copyright law provides for "fair dealing" rather than the broader "fair use" doctrine followed in some other jurisdictions.
In July this year, a single-judge bench of the Delhi High Court refused to grant ANI interim relief, holding that it would be against public interest. As reported by Business Standard, Justice Amit Bansal held that OpenAI's storage of news material published by ANI to train ChatGPT did not appear to be copyright infringement. He added that irreparable injury would be caused not only to OpenAI but to public interest as well if any interim injunction is granted in favour of ANI. The agency has challenged this single-judge interim order before a Division Bench of the High Court, arguing that the single-judge's finding that an injunction would harm AI development and the public sits uneasily with OpenAI's own pleading that ANI's content is a minuscule fraction of its training data. The court's findings on the "fair dealing" exception and research exemption under the Copyright Act are expected to set important precedents for AI companies operating in India.
Given the absence of Indian precedent on AI training and copyright, Justice Amit Bansal appointed IP lawyer Adarsh Ramanujan and NLSIU law professor Dr Arul George Scaria as amici curiae to assist the court. According to The Economic Times, an intervenor is a third party who was not originally part of the case but steps in because the judgment will directly affect their interests or rights. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, attending via video conference on behalf of an intervenor, requested that his client also be heard in the matter, telling the court that "This has global implications." The court's findings on the "fair dealing" exception and research exemption under the Copyright Act are expected to set important precedents for AI companies operating in India. Senior Advocate Arvind Datar, also representing the Broadband India Forum, said that a formal intervening application would be filed.
