Politics

India proposes mandatory licensing model for AI training to protect creators’ rights

Tuesday, 9 December 2025 8:09AM UTC

A new government framework in India aims to balance AI development and creator remuneration through a 'One Nation One License One Payment' model, requiring AI systems to obtain lawful access to works and pay royalties, with stakeholders set to give feedback during a consultation period.

A government-appointed committee convened by the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT) has proposed a “One Nation One License One Payment” framework that would allow generative AI systems to train on any lawfully accessed copyright-protected works in India, in exchange for a mandatory blanket licence and statutory remuneration for creators. According to the executive summary of the committee’s working paper, the model is intended to preserve creators’ rights while supplying AI developers with predictable access to broad datasets. ^[1]^[3]

The committee, formed on 28 April 2025, framed the proposal as a hybrid solution after consulting technology firms and content-industry representatives and reviewing international approaches in the US, EU, UK, Japan and Singapore. Industry submissions reportedly favoured a text-and-data-mining (TDM) exception, while content bodies pushed for licensing; the panel concluded that an unqualified TDM exception would weaken copyright and leave creators uncompensated. The paper argues a compulsory blanket licence paired with royalties strikes a balance between access and protection. ^[1]^[3]^[6]

Under the proposal, AI developers would be able to use any works to which they had obtained lawful access for training without seeking individual permissions, but royalty payments would become due only once products or services trained on those works are commercialised. The committee recommends that rates be tied to revenue generated by covered AI systems and determined by a government-appointed body, providing judicial review of royalty-setting to ensure fairness. The approach aims to minimise transaction costs for developers while guaranteeing creators a stream of remuneration. ^[1]^[3]

To administer collections and distributions, the paper proposes a single nonprofit central body , the Copyright Royalties Collective for AI Training (CRCAT) , designated under the Copyright Act. CRCAT would comprise one member organisation per class of works (for example existing collective management organisations) and would run a works-registration database to allocate royalties, including payments to non-members who register their works. Unclaimed funds in sectors lacking CMOs would be held for three years and then directed to a CRCAT welfare fund. ^[1]^[3]

The committee stressed that the licence would be conditional on lawful access: developers could not rely on the mandatory licence to circumvent paywalls or technological protection measures, and past unauthorised use would remain subject to current law and litigation. The paper framed this requirement as essential to give creators legal protection while offering AI firms “legal certainty” going forward. It also warned that opt-out or narrow TDM schemes would leave smaller creators vulnerable and could degrade dataset representativeness. ^[1]^[5]^[7]

Trade and publisher groups have publicly welcomed stronger protections for paid content, with industry bodies urging frameworks that ensure remuneration and attribution for journalistic and creative works. The DPIIT paper, the committee said, now seeks stakeholder responses as part of a public consultation period. Media reports note the government has invited feedback within 30 days. ^[4]^[2]

The committee indicated a second part of its working paper will address the copyright status of AI-generated outputs, including authorship, moral rights and liability for infringing outputs, signalling further potential changes to India’s copyright regime as policymakers attempt to reconcile innovation and cultural incentives. Industry data and legal analyses underline that India currently does not recognise machines as authors, a principle that will inform the forthcoming recommendations. ^[1]^[5]^[6]

📌 Reference Map:

##Reference Map:

^[1] (BestMediaInfo) - Paragraph 1, Paragraph 2, Paragraph 3, Paragraph 4, Paragraph 5, Paragraph 7
^[3] (The Economic Times) - Paragraph 1, Paragraph 2, Paragraph 3, Paragraph 4
^[6] (Mondaq - AI regulation) - Paragraph 2, Paragraph 7
^[5] (Mondaq - copyright ownership) - Paragraph 5, Paragraph 7
^[4] (Business Standard / DNPA) - Paragraph 6
^[2] (The Week) - Paragraph 6

Source: Noah Wire Services

More on this

https://bestmediainfo.com/mediainfo/mediainfo-digital/govt-ai-panel-backs-blanket-copyright-license-and-royalties-for-genai-training-10894667 - Please view link - unable to able to access data
https://www.theweek.in/wire-updates/business/2025/12/09/dcm21-biz-dpiit-copyright-ai.html - A government committee has proposed a mandatory blanket licence for AI developers to use all legally accessed copyright-protected works for training AI systems. This licence would be accompanied by a statutory remuneration right for copyright holders. The committee, formed by the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT), aims to balance the interests of AI developers and content creators. The proposal seeks public feedback within 30 days. ([theweek.in](https://www.theweek.in/wire-updates/business/2025/12/09/dcm21-biz-dpiit-copyright-ai.html?utm_source=openai))
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/technology/govt-committee-proposes-mandatory-blanket-licence-for-ai-training/articleshow/125862228.cms - An Indian government committee has recommended a mandatory blanket licence for AI developers to train models on any legally accessed copyrighted work without seeking individual permission from creators. This approach aims to streamline AI development while ensuring fair compensation for content creators. The proposal includes setting up a central royalty-collection body to manage remuneration. ([economictimes.indiatimes.com](https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/technology/govt-committee-proposes-mandatory-blanket-licence-for-ai-training/articleshow/125862228.cms?utm_source=openai))
https://www.business-standard.com/industry/news/dnpa-calls-for-copyright-protection-in-ai-training-backs-govt-initiative-125062100967_1.html - The Digital News Publishers Association (DNPA) has welcomed the Indian government's initiative to review the intersection of AI and copyright law. DNPA emphasizes the importance of protecting content rights, especially as AI models increasingly rely on journalistic material without proper attribution or remuneration. The association advocates for a regulatory framework that ensures fair compensation for content producers. ([business-standard.com](https://www.business-standard.com/industry/news/dnpa-calls-for-copyright-protection-in-ai-training-backs-govt-initiative-125062100967_1.html?utm_source=openai))
https://www.mondaq.com/india/patent/1653344/generative-ai-copyright-law-in-india-who-owns-machine-made-works - This article discusses the ownership of AI-generated content under Indian copyright law. It highlights that current laws do not recognize AI as an author, and therefore, no copyright subsists in purely AI-generated content unless a human can be shown to have exercised creative control over the output. The piece also addresses the implications of using copyrighted data for AI training and the potential for infringement. ([mondaq.com](https://www.mondaq.com/india/patent/1653344/generative-ai-copyright-law-in-india-who-owns-machine-made-works?utm_source=openai))
https://www.mondaq.com/india/new-technology/1707626/ai-regulation-the-indian-way-interpreting-the-new-governance-guidelines - This article interprets India's new AI governance guidelines, focusing on the complexities of copyright in AI systems. It discusses the establishment of a committee by the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT) to examine the legality of using copyrighted works for AI training and the copyrightability of AI-generated outputs. The piece also reviews international best practices and recommends a balanced framework that facilitates innovation while protecting the rights of copyright holders. ([mondaq.com](https://www.mondaq.com/india/new-technology/1707626/ai-regulation-the-indian-way-interpreting-the-new-governance-guidelines?utm_source=openai))
https://www.ijlra.com/uploads/825022211.pdf - This document examines the challenges posed by AI in the Indian film and music industries, particularly concerning the use of copyrighted content for AI training without permission. It highlights the lack of legal clarity regarding the attribution, licensing, and enforcement of rights in AI-generated components. The piece also discusses the absence of judicial precedent in India on authorship or copyright in AI-generated content, leading to ongoing uncertainty. ([ijlra.com](https://www.ijlra.com/uploads/825022211.pdf?utm_source=openai))

Noah Fact Check Pro

The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may warrant further investigation.

Freshness check

Score: 9

Notes: The narrative is recent, with the committee's working paper released on December 8, 2025. The earliest known publication date of substantially similar content is June 22, 2025, when the Digital News Publishers Association (DNPA) called for copyright protection in AI training. ([indiatoday.in](https://www.indiatoday.in/business/story/digital-news-publishers-body-seeks-copyright-protection-in-ai-training-practices-2744532-2025-06-22?utm_source=openai)) The report is based on a government-commissioned committee's findings, which typically warrants a high freshness score. No discrepancies in figures, dates, or quotes were found. The narrative includes updated data and new recommendations, justifying a higher freshness score.

Quotes check

Score: 10

Notes: No direct quotes were identified in the provided text. The narrative relies on summarised information from the committee's working paper and other sources. The absence of direct quotes suggests the content is potentially original or exclusive.

Source reliability

Score: 8

Notes: The narrative originates from BestMediaInfo, a reputable source in the media industry. The report is based on a government-commissioned committee's findings, which adds credibility. However, the reliance on a single source for the committee's recommendations introduces some uncertainty.

Plausability check

Score: 9

Notes: The proposed 'One Nation One License One Payment' framework aligns with ongoing global discussions on AI and copyright. The committee's recommendations are consistent with previous calls for fair compensation in AI training. The narrative lacks specific factual anchors, such as direct quotes or detailed data, which slightly reduces its plausibility score. The language and tone are consistent with official reports, and there are no signs of excessive or off-topic detail.

Overall assessment

Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): PASS

Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): HIGH

Summary: The narrative presents recent and original content based on a government-commissioned committee's findings, with no significant discrepancies or signs of disinformation. The reliance on a single source for the committee's recommendations introduces some uncertainty, but overall, the report is credible and aligns with ongoing discussions on AI and copyright.

AI
Copyright
India