Law Student Challenges University's AI Plagiarism Accusation, Sparking Debate on AI Use in Academia

Law Student Challenges AI Plagiarism Accusation

Kaustubh Shakkarwar, a Master of Laws (LLM) student at OP Jindal Global University, has filed a petition in the Punjab and Haryana High Court challenging the university's decision to fail him for allegedly submitting AI-generated content in his exam 1

1

. The case has sparked a debate on the use of AI in academia and the reliability of AI detection tools.

The Accusation and Legal Challenge

Shakkarwar, an IP lawyer pursuing a specialization in Intellectual Property and Technology Laws, was accused by the university's Unfair Means Committee of submitting "88% AI-generated" answers in his end-term exam for the course "Law and Justice in the Globalising World" 2

2

. The committee used Turnitin's AI-detection software to arrive at this conclusion, resulting in Shakkarwar failing the subject 1

1

.

The student has vehemently denied using AI and argues that even if he had, it would not constitute plagiarism under current copyright laws 1

1

. Justice Jasgurpeet Singh Puri has listed the matter for further hearing on November 14 3

3

.

Legal Arguments and Copyright Implications

Shakkarwar's petition raises several intriguing legal points:

1. He contends that the university's rules do not properly define or enforce laws against plagiarism, citing the Haryana Private Universities Act, 2006 1

   1

   .

2. Citing Section 2(d) of The Copyright Act, 1957, Shakkarwar argues that even if AI was used, he would be considered the "author" of the content and thus the copyright owner 1

   1

   .

3. He references the Supreme Court ruling in 'R.Anand vs M/S. Delux Films & Ors' to argue that plagiarism constitutes copyright infringement, which he claims cannot apply in this case 1

   1

   .

Broader Implications for AI and Copyright

This case highlights the growing challenges posed by AI in academic and legal contexts. It raises questions about the reliability of AI detection tools, with Medianama's experiment showing inconsistent results across different plagiarism detectors 1

1

.

The lawsuit also touches on broader issues of AI and copyright law. In a related U.S. case, Thaler v. Perlmutter, a court upheld the principle that copyright law applies only to human-created works, while acknowledging the complexities arising from AI's role in creative processes 2

2

.

University's Stance and Next Steps

OP Jindal Global University has been asked to respond to the petition 3

3

. The case's outcome could have significant implications for how educational institutions handle AI-related issues and may set precedents for similar cases both nationally and internationally.

As AI continues to evolve and integrate into various aspects of academia and professional life, this case underscores the need for clearer guidelines and legal frameworks to address the challenges posed by AI-generated content in educational and professional settings.