Society’s various concerns about AI must suitably be placed into a national legal strategy.
India’s Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT) recently published a report suggesting that artificial intelligence (AI) companies could have unrestricted access to copyright-protected works subject to minimum legal compensation for the copyright holders. DPIIT recommended that this hybrid approach be adopted after a comprehensive review of existing models from around the world and kept in mind broader principles of technological growth and fair compensation for content creators.
This report is an important step in the study of AI policy in India. But the need for striking the balance between copyright protection and AI access to data is only one of the concerns about AI that necessitate public policy action. A comprehensive AI framework would also need to take into consideration issues of privacy, safety, cybersecurity, surveillance, and jobs.
With respect to copyright, the rapid growth of generative AI models has raised concerns about whether current laws adequately protect creators while allowing AI innovation. DPIIT set up an expert committee in April 2025 to study these issues and suggest how India should regulate AI’s use of copyrighted works. It examined international models, such as text-and-data mining exceptions and voluntary licensing, and concluded that none of the existing approaches balanced creators’ rights with AI innovation perfectly. DPIIT’s approach would create a statutory scheme for providing fair compensation to copyright holders while permitting AI firms to have blanket access to publicly available copyrighted work.
The DPIIT report’s emphasis on copyright is an indication of the importance of copyright-protected industries to economic output. For example, in the United States, so-called copyright industries, industries that create, distribute, or otherwise work with copyright materials, contributed $2.9 trillion to the nation’s GDP. Similarly, the Indian Copyright Office issued more than 38,000 registration certificates in 2024 alone, highlighting the high level of economic activity associated with intellectual property.
Copyright is an important issue deserving of further study. Although AI as a technology may be equally important to the economy, it may be a stretch, at least at this stage, to grant AI companies any blanket waiver to use others’ copyrighted material when the business case for AI is still evolving. Strong copyright protection may well remain essential for innovation and economic growth, too.
Beyond copyright, AI can also pose privacy risks, even notwithstanding the Digital Personal Data Protection Act of 2023. Furthermore, existing laws do not clearly define liability for AI-generated harms, creating legal uncertainty. Cybersecurity risks and AI-related surveillance also raise important human rights concerns that require dedicated regulatory concerns. By adopting a comprehensive policy framework for AI, India could finally ensure that fruits of technological growth are distributed fairly across one and all, respecting the democratic ethos and economic demands of the country.
Such a comprehensive framework could address a variety of regulatory concerns observed and discussed in various research studies. Data bias, fairness, and discrimination are major concerns. But India currently lacks legally mandated standards for testing and redressing data bias. If AI is trained on biased and incomplete data, it can produce discriminatory outcomes. This would ultimately affect group equality and fundamental rights as enshrined in the Constitution of India.
Another set of concerns relate to direct user harms, the applicability of data protection laws, and impacts on the job market. The government of India recently circulated a draft rule to address some of the harms to users and others created by synthetically generated content. Under this draft rule, the technology companies would need to earmark a certain portion of content so that it clearly shows their usage of AI.
When it comes to the interface of data protection law and AI, remaining needs for new legislation is currently unknown. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act has only recently started to be enforced, so there is a need for further research in this area.
One of the biggest policy concerns about AI development relates to the job market. The think tank NITI Aayog recently came out with a report on the need for upskilling the education and workforce in the face of technological prowess and how India should take the lead on doing so. The implementation of such recommendations, however, may be a challenge in a labor market environment in which the government must already give a policy push in an effort to absorb talent in the market at apprenticeship level.
Last, but certainly not least, one of the lesser-known dimensions of an Indian regulatory framework for AI should take into account the importance of promoting competition. The Competition Commission of India recently conducted a market study to understand competition aspects of AI where it consulted more than 20 stakeholders on the basis of a defined questionnaire. The study serves as a baseline for advocacy and provides the groundwork for the Commission to open a formal investigation should evidence of anti-competitive activity such as exclusive contracts, algorithmic collusion, or price discrimination grow starker.
The need of the hour is to enact a concrete AI policy framework. The government has already done some work in terms of reviewing the existing literature, consulting stakeholders, and publishing a policy report on one issue that this policy framework should address, namely, copyright. But an AI framework for India should address other important concerns, such as those about harm, privacy, data protection, and jobs. The government needs to act now to ensure that the insights drawn by DPIIT with respect to copyright are suitably placed into law and policy—and that other concerns are addressed as part of a national strategy.
