"The Department concludes that free access to content - a "zero price license model" - is not appropriate because it "would undermine incentives for human creativity and could lead to long-term underproduction of human generated content." The Committee's members also found "access to large volumes of data and high-quality data is crucial for AI development" but fears negotiations to license that content could lead to "long negotiations and high transaction costs [which] can hold back innovation, particularly for startups and MSMEs.""
"AI developers receive a blanket license for the use of all lawfully accessed content for training purposes, without requiring individual negotiations; Royalties become payable only upon commercialization of the AI tools, with rates set by a government appointed committee. The rates would be subject to judicial review. A centralized mechanism handles royalty collection and distribution aiming to reduce transaction costs, provide legal certainty, and support equitable access for both large and small AI developers."
India proposes that AI developers pay royalties for copyrighted content used to train models only after they commercialize their tools. A Committee on Generative Artificial Intelligence and Copyright formed by India's Department of Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade identified widespread unpaid use of copyrighted material and warned that a zero-price license model could undermine incentives for human creativity and reduce production of human-generated content. The Committee emphasized that access to large, high-quality datasets is crucial but that bilateral licensing could impose long negotiations and high transaction costs. The Committee proposed a hybrid approach: blanket training licenses, commercialization-triggered royalties set by a government committee and collected by a centralized nonprofit collective (CRCAT), plus a Works Database to support royalty calculation and distribution.
Read at Theregister
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]