Artificial Intelligence and Its Relevance in Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Laws

Author(s): Alok Singh

Paper Details: Volume 3, Issue 1

Citation: IJLSSS 3(1) 50

Page No: 524-542

INTRODUCTION

Artificial Intelligence has transformed various sectors and industries by automating tasks that were traditionally performed by humans, often requiring significant time and effort. Now, these processes are completed much more quickly. AI has made remarkable advancements in content creation and work generation, enabling the rapid production of large volumes of material, such as news articles, music compositions, research-related work, and other creative outputs. However, this evolution raises serious and complex legal challenges, particularly concerning copyright laws, prompting questions about their effectiveness and adequacy in addressing AI-generated content. As AI continues to evolve at an unprecedented rate, it is significantly influencing intellectual property (IP) protection.² Advanced AI chatbots like ChatGPT can generate highly sophisticated, human-like responses by leveraging vast amounts of text and data on which they have been trained. AI is becoming increasingly prevalent in the public sphere, and its role in business is expected to expand further. According to the UK government, AI contributed £3.7 billion to the UK economy last year, highlighting the growing interest and investment in this technology³.

These technological advancements will enhance how we interact with the internet and digital tools. However, rapid progress also brings significant risks, as many AI tools currently available have not been thoroughly explored and operate with minimal regulation. Prominent figures such as Elon Musk and the late Stephen Hawking have called for greater research and regulatory oversight to ensure AI development remains ethical. To address concerns surrounding AI, the European Commission (EC) introduced the Artificial Intelligence Act in 2021, which categorizes AI applications into three risk levels—unacceptable, high-risk, and non-high-risk—to promote transparency and user safety in AI development. Similarly, in April 2023, China’s Cyber Administration proposed draft regulations for generative AI services, aiming to balance technological growth with social stability.

In the UK, specific legislation to protect IP from AI-related risks is limited. In a 2022 consultation, the UK government reviewed whether copyright should extend to computer-generated works without a human author, ultimately maintaining existing legal protections for such works. Meanwhile, Chinese courts have ruled that AI-generated content can qualify for copyright protection when there is substantial human involvement in the creative process.⁴

Current IP regulations suggest that AI could pose challenges to copyright and ownership, raising questions about authorship, liability, and infringement. Generative AI relies on extensive datasets, often sourced from publicly available content, to produce new material. As a result, AI-generated content may unintentionally incorporate elements from pre-existing works, potentially leading to copyright disputes. In such cases, original creators might pursue legal action against AI developers or the organizations deploying these systems, though it remains unclear how such cases would be handled and who would bear responsibility. To mitigate IP risks, AI developers must implement safeguards to prevent unauthorized use of copyrighted material and establish agreements with third parties, including artists, image libraries, and database owners, for the data used in AI training. Additionally, users of AI-generated content, especially in commercial applications, must verify that their outputs do not infringe on third-party IP rights before using them.⁵

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE

Artificial Intelligence (AI) refers to intelligence generated by machines, in contrast to the natural intelligence exhibited by animals and living beings. More precisely, any form of intelligence that does not originate from biological entities falls under the category of AI.⁶ Intellectual Property (IP) pertains to original creations of human intellect, including artistic, literary, technical, and scientific works. These intangible assets originate as ideas in a creator’s mind before being transformed into tangible, real-world entities. Intellectual Property Rights (IPR), on the other hand, are legal protections granted to inventors and creators, ensuring exclusive rights over their innovations for a specific period. In India, IPR is a relatively new concept and remains in its early stages of development. As AI continues to advance at an unprecedented rate, concerns about Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) are becoming increasingly significant. How can AI-generated creations be protected? Who holds ownership over inventions produced by machine learning algorithms? These complex questions highlight the intricate relationship between AI and IPR, a field still in its infancy but rapidly evolving.⁷

At present, intellectual property law lacks specific provisions addressing AI. However, as we will explore further, AI and IP law are becoming increasingly interconnected. AI is progressing rapidly across the globe, and its influence on intellectual property rights is growing⁸. As a result, it is essential for legal frameworks to acknowledge these changes and adapt existing regulations accordingly.

THE INTERSECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) serve as a fundamental tool for safeguarding and fostering human innovation. However, the intersection of AI and regulations such as copyright and patents remain a relatively new and evolving area of discussion⁹. A key debate surrounding AI and IPR is the distinction between human-generated and AI-generated content, as well as determining accountability in cases where AI-driven technologies fail or cause harm. Current IP laws are not fully equipped to handle issues related to the identification of inventors and potential violations when AI contributes to creation. Policymakers face significant challenges in this regard, making it a topic of ongoing debate among legal experts and lawmakers¹⁰. As AI-driven innovation continues to reshape industries, it is imperative to establish clear legal frameworks that effectively address the complexities of AI-generated intellectual property.

EVOLVING RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN AI AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS

Intellectual property rights (IPR) systems worldwide operate based on several key principles. One fundamental principle is exclusivity, which grants creators sole rights over their inventions, providing them with a competitive advantage. Additionally, the principle of territoriality ensures that IPR protection is confined to specific jurisdictions, aligning with each country’s legal framework¹¹. By analysing vast amounts of data and identifying patterns, AI systems can make informed decisions, adapt to new scenarios, and even exhibit behaviours resembling human cognition. However, AI operates within a defined scope and lacks the broader reasoning and cognitive abilities inherent in human intelligence¹².Understanding the capabilities, limitations, and ethical implications of AI is crucial in assessing its transformative impact on industries,

society, and the future. Today, AI-driven algorithms and machine learning models can autonomously generate diverse content, including art, music, literature, and scientific discoveries. This ability challenges conventional notions of creativity and human ingenuity. AI’s capacity to analyse data, recognize patterns, and produce unique outputs sometimes surpassing human imagination raises critical questions about authorship, ownership, and the originality of AI-generated works. This, in turn, encourages investment and commercialization while promoting collaboration through knowledge-sharing, ultimately driving societal advancement. At its core, IPR serves as a catalyst for progress by providing incentives and protections that fuel innovation and shape the future.¹³

However, IPR systems also face notable challenges. One major issue is finding the right balance between encouraging innovation and ensuring access to knowledge. While strong IPR protection incentivizes creativity, overly restrictive measures can hinder the dissemination of knowledge, potentially stifling progress. Additionally, IPR frameworks often struggle to keep pace with rapid technological advancements, requiring continuous evaluation and updates to remain effective in addressing emerging challenges. The enforcement of IPR can also be costly and complex, posing difficulties for individuals and smaller organizations with limited resources. Legal disputes and enforcement proceedings can be time-consuming and financially burdensome, creating barriers to justice for those seeking to protect their intellectual property.

Establishing a more accessible and efficient enforcement framework is essential to ensuring that all creators benefit from IPR protections without unnecessary obstacles. The intersection of AI and intellectual property rights is a rapidly evolving and complex landscape. One pressing issue is determining ownership and protection for intellectual property generated by AI systems. As AI algorithms can create artistic and literary works with minimal or no human involvement, traditional concepts of authorship and copyright may not always apply, making it difficult to attribute ownership.

OWNERSHIP OF AI-GENERATED CONTENT

In India, as in many other countries such as the USA and Canada, the issue of ownership and protection of AI-generated content remains unresolved. While certain AI-generated products and tools may qualify for intellectual property (IP) protection, existing laws do not explicitly address ownership rights over AI- created content¹⁴. A study conducted by Dentons on AI found that 86% of participants believed legislation is necessary to clarify IP protection in the AI context, with 45% considering it an urgent priority. This highlights the pressing need to address the complexities surrounding the rightful ownership and authorship of AI-generated works, as the relationship between intellectual property and AI continues to deepen.

Traditional IP protection mechanisms are inherently human-centered, raising questions about the ownership of creations that are directly generated or assisted by AI. The blurred distinction between authorship and ownership in AI- generated or AI-assisted works creates challenges in identifying the legitimate creator and rightful owner. Algorithmic authorship further complicates this issue, as conventional copyright law assumes that the author—and thus the owner is a human being¹⁵. However, assigning intellectual property rights to non-human entities presents legal and ethical challenges. One possible solution is the application of the “work made for hire” doctrine, where the programmer or developer is recognized as the owner of AI-generated content. Some jurisdictions, such as the UK and New Zealand, have introduced provisions

IMPACT OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ON PATENTS, TRADEMARKS, AND COPYRIGHT LAWS

The rapid expansion of the artificial intelligence (AI) industry has significantly influenced intellectual property (IP) regulations, as highlighted by estimates from global organizations such as the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). Between 2013 and 2016, WIPO recorded an annual growth rate of 28% in AI-related technologies¹⁶. From 1956 to 2017, more than 1.6 million academic papers focusing on AI were published, alongside approximately 340,000 patent applications for AI-driven innovations. In 2017 alone, WIPO received 55,660 AI patent applications, reflecting a 300% increase compared to 2011. These developments have raised substantial challenges in the realm of intellectual property law. Currently, AI-generated creations that are produced without direct human involvement are not eligible for copyright or patent protection in jurisdictions such as India and the United States. However, efforts have been made to challenge this legal norm. One such initiative was led by Stephen Thaler, the CEO of Thaler, an innovation company based in Missouri, USA. Thaler developed an AI system called DABUS, which generated a piece of artwork titled A Recent Entrance to Paradise after analysing an extensive collection of images¹⁷. Although the U.S. Copyright Office initially rejected Thaler’s copyright application, his company appealed the decision, arguing that human authorization should not be a requirement for copyright protection. However, the U.S. Copyright Review Board upheld the original decision, reaffirming that copyright law does not currently recognize AI-generated works.

In general, copyright laws safeguard creative expressions that reflect an author’s originality. For instance, the source code of an AI program can be protected under copyright laws, similar to any other software program¹⁸. However, copyright protection does not prevent individuals from developing AI systems using alternative source codes that function on similar algorithms. Additionally, data plays a vital role in AI development, and the selection or structuring of data may qualify as an intellectual creation eligible for IP protection¹⁹. In cases of copyright infringement lawsuits, courts closely examine the specifics of AI development and operation.

One possible approach to addressing these issues is a modified “Abstraction- Filtration-Comparison” test, which could help distinguish between copyrightable human-created works and fully automated outputs that do not qualify for copyright protection²⁰. Systems like RACTER, where a programmer actively guides the AI’s output, face fewer legal hurdles than autonomous AI systems like the Creativity Machine, which sources information from the internet. Granting copyright in such cases could inadvertently allow AI- generated content to claim ownership over existing online data. In contrast, when AI is used as a tool by a programmer who contributes significant intellectual input during the training process, the resulting work is more likely to meet the criteria for copyright protection.

Since AI technologies are designed to mimic human actions, the question of patenting AI-generated inventions has sparked significant debate. If AI- generated innovations were granted patent protection without strict human oversight, this could concentrate excessive power in the hands of a few dominant corporations that control AI technologies, potentially leading to harmful consequences²¹. There are three key issues in patent law that need to be addressed:

Whether existing patent eligibility standards should be modified to encourage AI-driven innovation.
Whether AI-created inventions should qualify for patent protection.
How liability should be determined in cases where AI infringes on an existing patent.

These unresolved legal questions call for careful evaluation and discussion. It is crucial to assess whether current patent standards foster or hinder technological progress. Furthermore, determining accountability when an AI system violates patent rights is a significant challenge. One possible solution is implementing compulsory insurance programs or recognizing AI as a legal entity in civil liability cases. Different liability models, such as strict liability, negligence- based liability, or product liability, should be analyzed to determine their suitability in AI-related patent disputes. Granting patent rights to AI-generated inventions has the potential to drive innovation and facilitate unprecedented advancements that may be beyond the scope of human creativity alone.²² However, as artificial intelligence continues to evolve, new complexities emerge in the realm of trademark protection.

While AI significantly enhances trademark searches, monitoring, and enforcement, it also presents challenges in maintaining brand uniqueness and differentiation. Striking the right balance between harnessing AI’s benefits and protecting the essence of brand identities requires well-structured legal strategies that adapt to technological progress. Future policies and legislative amendments should focus on fostering innovation while ensuring that societal interests are safeguarded.

AI AND PATENTS: CHALLENGES IN PATENTABILITY

Patent laws are designed to protect new, non-obvious, and industrially applicable inventions. However, the patentability of AI-driven innovations remains a complex issue due to the nature of AI’s functioning. AI systems primarily replicate human tasks by leveraging machine learning algorithms and vast datasets, making it difficult to classify them as “inventions” under existing patent laws. For instance, Microsoft’s Inner Eye project—an AI system that assists oncologists in identifying and targeting cancerous tumours—operates by analysing MRI scans and delineating tumours from healthy tissue. Traditionally, oncologists would manually outline tumours on 3D images. If Microsoft were to seek a patent for this AI-driven task, it would likely face rejection, as the AI is merely automating an already known human practice, rather than creating a fundamentally invention.

CHALLENGES IN PATENTING AI INNOVATIONS

Lack of Human Inventorship – Patent laws across the world, including India’s Patent Act, 1970, recognize only human inventors. AI-generated inventions raise questions about whether AI can be considered an “inventor” and, if not, who holds the patent rights—the developer, the user, or the entity that trained the AI.
Non-Obviousness and Inventive Step – AI algorithms often analyze vast datasets and identify patterns that may not be obvious to a human. The challenge is determining whether AI-derived insights should qualify as “non-obvious”, a key requirement for patentability.
Disclosure Requirement – Patent applications require a detailed description of the invention, including how it functions. AI, especially deep learning models, operates as a “black box”, making it difficult to fully describe the inventive process and meet patent disclosure requirements.

THE INDIAN PERSPECTIVE ON AI AND PATENTS

Indian Patent Act, 1970, does not explicitly address AI-generated inventions. However, under Section 3(k) of the Act, “mathematical or business methods, computer programs per se, or algorithms” are deemed non-patentable²³.This restriction limits the patentability of AI algorithms unless they are integrated into a larger technical innovation. A case in point is the Indian Patent Office’s refusal of AI-related patent applications where the claims were based purely on computational methods or software-based AI systems. Indian courts and policymakers are still deliberating on how to accommodate AI within the country’s patent framework, balancing the need to encourage innovation with the necessity of maintaining legal clarity.

AI AND COPYRIGHT: OWNERSHIP AND PROTECTION CHALLENGES

Unlike patents, copyright law protects creative works such as literature, music, and art, which are traditionally attributed to human authors. Traditional copyright frameworks do not recognize AI-generated works as eligible for copyright protection.

THE GLOBAL COPYRIGHT DEBATE ON AI-GENERATED WORKS

A landmark case that sparked international discussion on AI and copyright was the “Monkey Selfie” dispute in the United States. The U.S. Copyright Office ruled that only human-created works are eligible for copyright, excluding any non-human or AI-generated works from protection.

However, legal frameworks in different countries vary:

United Kingdom: The UK Copyright Act states that for computer- generated works, the person who made the arrangements for the work’s creation is considered the author. This approach allows human programmers or users of AI to claim copyright ownership.
European Union & USA: Copyright is granted only to human creators, making AI-generated content public domain unless there is clear human authorship.

THE INDIAN LEGAL POSITION ON AI AND COPYRIGHT

Indian Copyright Act, 1957, defines “author” under Section 2(d) as:

“In relation to any literary, dramatic, musical, or artistic work which is computer-generated, the person who causes the work to be created.”

This provision is similar to the UK approach, implying that the individual or entity responsible for training and operating the AI such as a developer, programmer, or user could be considered the rightful author of an AI-generated work.²⁴ However, with autonomous AI systems, where minimal or no human intervention is involved, determining authorship becomes increasingly complex²⁵. Questions arise as to whether AI itself should be recognized as an author or if copyright should be granted to those who develop and train the AI models.

EMERGING CHALLENGES IN AI COPYRIGHT PROTECTION

AI-Created Music, Art, and Literature – AI models such as AIVA, DALL·E, and ChatGPT are capable of generating original compositions, artworks, and literary pieces. Should these AI-generated works be granted copyright protection, or should they remain freely accessible to all?
Mimicry and Plagiarism Issues – AI models are trained on existing copyrighted materials, leading to potential copyright infringement if AI- generated content too closely resembles the original works.
Economic and Ethical Considerations – AI-generated works compete with human artists, writers, and musicians, raising concerns about fair compensation and the impact on creative industries.

THE WAY FORWARD FOR AI-GENERATED COPYRIGHT IN INDIA

Developing Clear AI Copyright Policies – India needs updated legal provisions to address the growing use of AI in creative fields. Copyright laws must establish clear guidelines for human authorship and AI-assisted creativity.

Introducing Hybrid Copyright Models – A tiered copyright system could be introduced, where:

Full copyright protection is granted when human involvement in AI-generated content is significant.
Limited rights or public domain status is assigned to fully autonomous AI-generated works.
AI and Fair Use Considerations – Establishing fair-use guidelines for AI-generated works can help balance innovation with intellectual property protection, ensuring that human artists and AI developers benefit equitably.

AI-GENERATED MUSIC & COPYRIGHT LIABILITY

If a composer’s copyrighted work is used to train an AI system that subsequently generates new songs, the responsibility of proving infringement falls on the original composer or singer. They would need to establish a clear connection between the AI-generated song and their work. However, doing so

would require reverse-engineering the neural network, which is practically unfeasible. Additionally, the high costs associated with legal proceedings make it difficult for independent musicians and emerging artists to pursue copyright claims.²⁶ Artificial intelligence has been a part of the music industry for decades. Computer science pioneer Alan Turing developed a basic melody- generating system as early as 1951. By 1984, composer George Lewis incorporated three Apple II computers to create live quartet improvisations. In the 1990s, legendary artist David Bowie experimented with a digital lyric randomizer. More recently, in 2018, the first AI-generated pop album, hello, World, was released²⁷. India has also witnessed AI-driven musical innovations, with musicians and tech startups integrating AI in film compositions and independent music production.

For example, Bollywood music composers have begun leveraging AI-assisted tools to create background scores, remix tracks, and enhance compositions. T-Series, a major Indian music label, has explored AI-driven music enhancements, and AI-generated background scores have been used in regional cinema. In copyright infringement cases involving AI- generated music, proving awareness of the original work and demonstrating substantial similarity between the AI-generated piece and the alleged infringing song is essential. “Substantial similarity” in AI-generated music refers to how closely the AI-produced composition aligns with a human-created piece in terms of melody, harmony, rhythm, and structure.²⁸

For instance, platforms like Song master have stopped promoting AI-generated songs that mimic the styles of renowned artists like Taylor Swift and Beyoncé, marking a positive step toward addressing copyright concerns²⁹. An important legal question remains: how much human involvement is required in AI-generated compositions for them to qualify for copyright protection? Establishing clear guidelines is necessary to determine whether such music can be copyrighted. Another key issue is identifying the rightful author or creator of AI-generated works.³⁰

DISPUTES OVER INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY IN AI-GENERATED CONTENT

The rise of artificial intelligence (AI) has led to numerous intellectual property rights (IPR) disputes and legal challenges in India. One such case involved AI- generated music and the unauthorized use of Bollywood songs to train machine learning models.³¹ Several Indian music labels raised concerns about AI tools that replicated the styles of legendary playback singers like Kishore Kumar and Lata Mangeshkar without obtaining the necessary licenses. This issue brought to light the complexities of copyright protection in the era of AI-generated content. A similar dispute arose in the Indian publishing industry when an AI-powered writing assistant generated articles that closely resembled the work of established journalists.

This led to debates on whether AI-generated content could be considered an original literary work and whether its creators—or the AI system itself—could claim copyright ownership. The absence of clear legal guidelines regarding AI-authored works created uncertainty about their intellectual property status.³² The Indian legal system currently lacks explicit provisions addressing AI-generated works, making it challenging to resolve disputes involving AI-created content. While existing copyright laws, such as the Copyright Act of 1957, require human authorship for protection, emerging cases highlight the need for updated regulations to address the growing role of AI in creative industries. The evolving legal landscape in India underscores the importance of establishing clear policies to govern AI-generated content and protect the rights of creators.³³

FUTURE CHALLENGES

In today’s fast-evolving digital landscape, artificial intelligence (AI) is playing an increasingly significant role in the creation, protection, and management of intellectual property rights (IPR). While AI-driven advancements present groundbreaking opportunities, they also bring forth complex ethical and legal challenges that demand urgent attention. As AI-generated content becomes more prevalent across industries such as music, literature, art, and software development, it is crucial to establish robust frameworks that ensure responsible and ethical use. A major concern regarding AI in IPR is the question of ownership and authorship of AI-generated works. Traditional copyright laws, such as India’s Copyright Act of 1957, recognize human authorship as a fundamental requirement for copyright protection. However, with AI creating music, artworks, and even entire scripts autonomously, legal systems worldwide struggle to define whether AI should be recognized as an author or if the rights should belong to the developer, user, or the organization training the AI.

THE NEED FOR ETHICAL GUIDELINES AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS

To ensure fairness in the application of AI in IPR, policymakers, legal experts, and industry stakeholders must collaborate in developing comprehensive and adaptive legal frameworks. These frameworks should address multiple ethical challenges, such as:

AI Bias and Fairness: Many AI models are trained on historical data that may contain biases, leading to discriminatory outputs. Ensuring transparency in AI algorithms and minimizing biases in AI-generated content is crucial to fostering a fair and inclusive intellectual property ecosystem.
Privacy and Data Protection: AI systems often rely on vast amounts of personal and proprietary data to generate content. Regulations must safeguard user data and prevent unauthorized use of copyrighted works for training AI models.
Accountability and Liability: Establishing clear accountability in cases of copyright infringement by AI-generated works is essential. Should liability fall on the AI developer, the user, or the AI itself? Legal frameworks must address this ambiguity.

A multidisciplinary and proactive approach is needed to encourage innovation while ensuring ethical considerations are not overlooked. By implementing transparent AI governance policies, India can set a global example in balancing AI-driven innovation with intellectual property protection.

ENCOURAGING FLEXIBLE LICENSING MODELS FOR AI-GENERATED CONTENT

One of the most pressing concerns in AI-related IPR is striking the right balance between encouraging innovation and ensuring equitable access to AI-generated content. Traditional copyright models may not fully accommodate the complexities of AI-generated works, making it imperative to explore flexible and adaptable licensing structures.

Creative Commons and Open Innovation: Encouraging open-source AI-generated content under creative commons licenses can foster collaboration while ensuring fair credit and compensation to original contributors.

Hybrid Copyright Models: Implementing customized licensing models where AI-generated content is partially copyrighted while allowing fair use in non-commercial settings can help bridge the gap between innovation and accessibility.

Royalty-Based AI Creations: Introducing AI-assisted royalty structures can ensure fair remuneration for human contributors while allowing AI to serve as a creative collaborator rather than a sole creator.

THE URGENT NEED FOR GLOBAL HARMONIZATION OF AI-RELATED IPR

As AI technologies continue to transcend national boundaries, the fragmented nature of intellectual property laws across different countries poses significant challenges to international collaboration and fair competition. Currently, countries have divergent legal interpretations regarding AI-generated works, leading to inconsistencies in protection, enforcement, and recognition of AI- created intellectual property.

A global effort toward the harmonization of AI-related IPR is necessary to ensure consistent legal standards that protect AI-driven innovations while fostering international cooperation. A few crucial steps towards achieving this include:

Global AI Copyright Treaties: Establishing multilateral agreements under organizations like the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) to create standardized guidelines for AI-generated content.
Cross-Border Collaboration: Encouraging international partnerships between governments, AI developers, and legal institutions to create a shared regulatory framework that accommodates technological advancements.
Uniform Patent and Trademark Laws for AI Innovation: Developing unified patent and trademark regulations that protect AI-generated inventions while preventing patent monopolization that hinders innovation.

CONCLUSION

The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into intellectual property rights (IPR) presents both opportunities and challenges, reshaping the legal and technological landscape. AI acts as a “double-edged sword”—while it accelerates innovation in patents, trademarks, and copyright, it also introduces complex legal and ethical dilemmas related to authorship, ownership, and liability. Navigating these challenges requires a collaborative effort from policymakers, legal experts, industry leaders, and AI developers to ensure a fair and effective intellectual property system.

As AI continues to evolve and contribute to creative and technological advancements, it is essential to strike a balance between fostering innovation and protecting intellectual property rights. The rapid development of AI-generated content raises fundamental questions about who owns AI-generated works, who is liable for potential infringements, and how existing legal frameworks can adapt to these unprecedented challenges. Without clear regulations and ethical guidelines, there is a risk of misuse, copyright violations, and loss of human authorship recognition in various fields, including music, literature, visual arts, and software development.

The future of intellectual property rights in the AI era depends on how effectively we harness AI’s potential while maintaining fairness, accountability, and ethical integrity. India, with its robust legal framework and rapidly growing AI ecosystem, has the potential to lead global discussions on AI and intellectual property rights.