New Delhi: A government committee established by the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT) has put forth a new framework dubbed “One Nation One License One Payment” to regulate the training of generative AI systems on copyright-protected materials. This proposal suggests a hybrid model that combines a mandatory blanket license with statutory remuneration for creators.
The committee released an executive summary as Part I of its working paper on AI and copyright, addressing the critical challenge of safeguarding rights in human-created works while not hindering technological advancement. It calls for a balanced regulatory structure that preserves the integrity of India’s creative ecosystem while simultaneously promoting AI innovation.
Constituted on April 28, 2025, the committee was tasked with identifying legal issues associated with AI systems, reviewing existing frameworks, and recommending changes. Its specific mandate includes examining the use of copyright-protected works as training data and the copyright status of AI-generated outputs. This initial paper focuses on the training-data issue, while a subsequent part will explore authorship, moral rights, and liability concerning AI outputs.
The committee engaged in separate consultations with technology companies and content industry representatives. According to the paper, most tech and AI stakeholders advocated for a blanket text and data mining (TDM) exception that would permit AI training on copyrighted works. Conversely, content industry representatives unanimously favored a voluntary licensing model.
After analyzing regimes from the United States, Japan, UK, Singapore, and the European Union, the committee concluded that awaiting court decisions is suboptimal. It identified “significant suitability challenges” facing all major models examined, including voluntary licensing and both forms of TDM exception.
The panel was particularly opposed to the tech industry’s preferred TDM exception, stating that allowing such an exception for commercial AI training “would undermine copyright” and leave human creators “powerless to seek compensation” for the use of their works. This concern is amplified in a country characterized by a rich cultural heritage and a burgeoning content industry. Even a TDM model allowing an opt-out right for rights holders was deemed inadequate, as it could leave small creators vulnerable due to a lack of awareness and bargaining power.
To address the need for access while ensuring compensation, the committee proposed a hybrid model based on a mandatory blanket license, to be introduced through amendments to the Copyright Act, 1957. This model would guarantee that no copyright owner can prevent the use of their works for AI training, provided AI developers have legally accessed the content.
Under this framework, all lawfully accessed copyright-protected works would be available for training without the need for individual negotiations. The proposal aims to reduce transaction and compliance costs for AI developers while ensuring fair compensation for rights holders. Furthermore, it seeks to create a level playing field for both startups and larger companies, with royalty rates set by a government-appointed committee.
Royalties would be linked to the revenue generated by AI systems trained on copyrighted content, with a “certain percentage” of that revenue allocated to rights holders. Notably, payment obligations would arise only once an AI system is commercialized, thereby supporting early-stage innovation without imposing upfront fees during the training phase.
To implement this regime, the committee recommends the establishment of a centralized body called the Copyright Royalties Collective for AI Training (CRCAT). This nonprofit organization would be formed by associations of rights holders and designated by the Central Government under the Copyright Act.
Only organizations would be allowed as CRCAT members, with one member per class of works, such as existing copyright societies and collective management organizations. These members would manage online systems for tracking works registered for AI training royalties, allowing any copyright owner to register their works with essential metadata for accurate royalty allocation.
Royalties collected from AI developers would be channeled into CRCAT and subsequently distributed by member organizations to both their members and any non-members who have registered their works. Unclaimed royalties for sectors lacking CMOs would be held for three years, after which funds would be allocated to a CRCAT welfare fund aimed at supporting creators through community initiatives, subsidized equipment, and training programs.
The paper acknowledges that CRCAT members will require investments in capacity-building and digital infrastructure but contends that such implementation challenges should not impede creators’ rights to receive royalties. Instead, it calls for robust systems and a gradual approach to enable CMOs to develop necessary capabilities.
Critically, the proposed license hinges on lawful access, prohibiting AI developers from using the mandatory license to circumvent technological protection measures or paywalls. Once access is secured and any fees are paid, AI developers can utilize the works for training without needing further permission. This lawful-access condition is intended to be prospective, with past activities still governed by existing laws and court interpretations.
In conclusion, the committee argues that this hybrid model offers “legal certainty” for AI developers and predictable royalty flows for creators. It aims to provide a sustainable infrastructure that mitigates AI bias and hallucinations through broad, representative datasets. The proposal warns against unlicensed use of copyrighted content for AI training, asserting that a blanket exception would overly favor AI developers at the expense of cultural evolution and the production of human-generated content. Ultimately, the suggested hybrid model seeks to balance data access with the need to incentivize creators as India navigates the evolving landscape of AI technology.
See also
Congress Introduces AI Talent Act to Enhance Federal Workforce with Specialized Teams
Learning Tree Launches AI Workforce Solutions with Tiered Maturity Framework for Organizations
Trump Signs Executive Order to Block State AI Regulations, Citing Industry Risks
Government Confirms No AI Regulation for Scriptwriting Amid Industry Concerns on Copyright
Trump Bans State AI Laws, Igniting Legal Challenges and Civil Rights Concerns
