Answer:

Generative AI (GAI) is a subset of artificial intelligence that creates new content, such as text, images, music, or videos, by learning patterns from existing data. It can produce original and realistic outputs, posing unique challenges to legal frameworks and judicial precedents, particularly regarding intellectual property and liability.

Challenges Posed by Generative AI to legal frameworks and judicial precedents in India:

• Ambiguity in Liability: Traditional legal frameworks lack clarity in assigning liability for AI-generated content, complicating accountability issues.
  For example: The Shreya Singhal judgement upholding Section 79 of the IT Act which grants intermediaries safe harbour protection against hosting content, but its application to generative AI remains contentious.
• Intellectual Property Rights: Existing IP laws are inadequate in addressing ownership and copyright of AI-created works, leading to legal uncertainties.
  For instance: As per the  Parliamentary Standing Committee Report, the Copyright Act, 1957 is not well equipped to facilitate authorship and ownership by Artificial Intelligence.
• Privacy Concerns: The capacity of AI to process vast amounts of personal data raises substantial privacy issues, including potential misuse and data breaches.
  For example: The “right to erasure” principle under the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023, is becoming complex as AI models cannot unlearn absorbed data.
• Bias and Discrimination: AI systems can perpetuate or exacerbate existing biases, resulting in discriminatory outcomes not effectively addressed by current legal standards.
  For example : In 2014, Amazon developed an AI recruiting system that discriminated against women, demonstrating the need for bias detection and mitigation mechanisms.
• Regulation and Compliance: Current regulatory frameworks are insufficient to comprehensively govern AI activities, creating gaps in compliance and enforcement.
  For instance: Existing laws like the Information Technology Act do not specifically address AI-generated content , resulting in regulatory gaps
• Consumer Protection: The unpredictability of AI-generated content can lead to consumer protection issues, as traditional laws may not cover unforeseen AI behaviours.
  For instance: AI-generated deepfake videos can mislead consumers, causing reputational damage or financial loss due to their realistic nature and difficulty in being identified as fake.
• Cybersecurity Threats: The integration of AI in various sectors increases vulnerability to cyber-attacks, necessitating robust legal measures.
  For instance: Adversarial  cyberattacks can manipulate AI outputs, potentially leading to data breaches and posing  risks to sectors like finance and healthcare.
• Ethical and Moral Concerns: The ethical implications of AI decisions, particularly those affecting human rights, challenge existing judicial precedents and ethical norms.
  For instance: AI algorithms if  used in criminal justice can reinforce biases in sentencing, potentially leading to unfair treatment of certain groups.

​​Potential Solutions:

• Regulatory Framework: Develop and implement specific regulations addressing AI, including clear definitions and guidelines.
  For example: The Artificial Intelligence Act of the European Union establishes a common regulatory and legal framework for AI across the EU.
• Sandbox Immunity: Grant GAI platforms temporary liability immunity to allow responsible development and identification of  legal issues.
  For example: The UK has implemented sandbox environments for FinTech to innovate under regulatory supervision
• IP Law Reform: Update intellectual property laws to accommodate AI-generated works and clarify ownership rights.
  For example: The UK’s updated copyright law now includes protections for computer-generated works, granting copyright to the creator or programmer.
• Data Compliance: Developers must legally licence and compensate for intellectual property used in training AI models to ensure compliance.
  For instance: OpenAI has faced lawsuits over using copyrighted material for training without proper licensing, highlighting the need for clear data usage policies.
• Bias Mitigation: Implement measures to detect and mitigate biases in AI systems, ensuring fair and non-discriminatory outcomes.
  For instance: Implement measures like the Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency in Machine Learning (FAT/ML) principles to detect and mitigate biases in AI systems.
• Transparency Requirements: Mandate transparency and explainability standards for AI algorithms used in legal and judicial contexts.
  For example: The EU’s GDPR mandates transparency and the right to explanation, ensuring individuals understand automated decisions, thereby maintaining fairness and accountability in AI-driven legal systems.
• Ethical Guidelines: Formulate and enforce ethical guidelines for the use of AI in areas with significant social impact.
  For instance: Develop ethical guidelines for AI, akin to the Asilomar AI Principles, to ensure responsible AI usage in critical sectors like healthcare and criminal justice.

AI represents the future of technological advancement, offering transformative potential across various sectors. Addressing data privacy, intellectual property, and ethical concerns is crucial for responsibly harnessing its benefits. NITI Aayog’s National Strategy on Artificial Intelligence (NSAI), “AI for All,” aims to democratise AI usage and foster inclusive growth, ensuring that AI technology benefits all segments of society while promoting innovation and development in India.

DOWNLOAD PDF