Delhi High Court Allows Two-Week Window for Centre to Address PIL Concerning AI and Deepfake Regulation

In the realm of crafting content, three essential factors come into play: “perplexity,” “burstiness,” and “predictability.” Perplexity gauges the intricacy of text, while burstiness assesses the diversity of sentence structures. Human writing tends to embrace greater burstiness, incorporating a mix of longer, complex sentences and shorter ones. 

Conversely, AI-generated sentences often display a more uniform structure. For the forthcoming content creation, I require substantial perplexity and burstiness, coupled with a minimized predictability factor. Now, let’s reimagine the following text:

The Delhi High Court has granted the Center an extension of two weeks for presenting its response to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that addresses the absence of regulations governing Deepfake technology and artificial intelligence (AI) in India.

Advocate Chaitanya Rohilla, through advocate Manohar Lal, filed the PIL, specifically urging the Centre to take decisive action in identifying and limiting access to websites hosting deepfakes and AI. The PIL also calls for establishing comprehensive guidelines for regulating these technologies.

During the proceedings, the court emphasized the expansive nature of the issue, affirming that the Union of India is best suited to formulate the necessary regulations in response to the PIL.

The size of the issue was emphasized by Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet PS Arora, who said, “This issue has a large scale, so we thought that the Government of India would be the best to frame rules.” They set the date of the next hearing for February 19, saying, “Let the UoI apply its mind first.”

The Central government’s position on the same PIL was previously requested by the high court in December of the previous year. The petition requests that the court guarantee the fair application of AI and provide guidelines for deepfakes and AI access that are consistent with the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

During an earlier hearing, the bench, consisting of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Mini Pushkarna, acknowledged the intricate nature of AI and deepfake concerns. They highlighted the complexities involved in addressing these issues, emphasizing the need to comprehend the significance of technology and its advantageous aspects.

While the Centre’s counsel asserted that the PIL’s concerns fall within the domain of legislation and that the government is actively engaging with them, the court stressed the necessity of balancing conflicting interests and conducting extensive deliberations to find a solution.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top