AI-GENERATED CONTENT, DEEPFAKES, AND MEMES: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CHALLENGES IN THE INTERNET AGE

AUTHORS – VARTIKA MISHRA & VAISHNAVI,

STUDENTS AT AMITY UNIVERSITY PATNA, BIHAR

BEST CITATION – VARTIKA MISHRA & VAISHNAVI, AI-GENERATED CONTENT, DEEPFAKES, AND MEMES: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CHALLENGES IN THE INTERNET AGE, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (13) OF 2025, PG. 626-633, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344

Abstract

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has transformed the traditional notions of creativity, originality, and authorship that form the foundation of intellectual property law. From AI-generated artworks and deepfake videos to viral memes, the digital age has blurred the distinction between human and machine creativity. This paper examines the emerging legal and ethical challenges that arise at the intersection of AI-generated content and intellectual property rights (IPR). It explores whether works produced by AI systems qualify for copyright protection, how deepfakes infringe personality and moral rights, and to what extent memes fall within the boundaries of fair use and parody exceptions. Drawing upon Indian and international legal frameworks, this study critically analyses how the Copyright Act, 1957, the Information Technology Act, 2000, and corresponding international instruments such as the Berne Convention and TRIPS Agreement respond to these evolving challenges. The paper concludes with recommendations for reform, emphasizing the need for a dynamic legal approach that balances innovation with protection.

Keywords – Artificial Intelligence, Intellectual Property Rights, Copyright, Deepfakes, Memes, Fair Use, Authorship, AI Creativity, Information Technology Act, Moral Rights

CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY: COMPLIANCE OR PHILANTHROPY?

AUTHOR – SHAMSH SAMEED AHSAN, STUDENT AT AMITY LAW SCHOOL, AMITY UNIVERSITY

BEST CITATION – SHAMSH SAMEED AHSAN, CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY: COMPLIANCE OR PHILANTHROPY?, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (13) OF 2025, PG. 621-625, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344

Abstract

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has emerged as a cornerstone of contemporary corporate governance, balancing profit motives with societal welfare. In India, the enactment of Section 135 of the Companies Act, 2013, marked a paradigm shift from voluntary philanthropy to a statutory mandate. The question arises: is CSR a genuine expression of corporate conscience or a mere compliance exercise to satisfy legal requirements? This paper critically examines CSR’s evolution, legal framework, judicial interpretation, and practical implications under Section 135. It compares global CSR models, analyses compliance mechanisms, and evaluates whether India’s legal framework fosters authentic social responsibility or encourages tokenistic philanthropy. The article concludes by advocating a shift from compliance-based CSR to an integrated model of sustainable and accountable corporate citizenship.

Keywords: CSR, Section 135, Companies Act, Corporate Governance, Philanthropy, Sustainability.

BUY-BACK OF SHARES: LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND CORPORATE STRATEGY

AUTHOR – FAISAL IMAM, STUDENT AT AMITY LAW SCHOOL, AMITY UNIVERSITY

BEST CITATION – FAISAL IMAM, BUY-BACK OF SHARES: LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND CORPORATE STRATEGY, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (13) OF 2025, PG. 616-620, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344

Abstract

The buy-back of shares has evolved as a key instrument of financial and corporate restructuring in modern company law. It enables a company to repurchase its own shares, reduce outstanding equity, and enhance shareholder value through redistribution of surplus funds. In India, the legal framework governing buy-backs is primarily embedded in Sections 68 to 70 of the Companies Act, 2013, supported by the SEBI (Buy-Back of Securities) Regulations, 2018. This paper examines the statutory provisions, regulatory compliance requirements, corporate motivations, and strategic implications of buy-back transactions. It further explores judicial pronouncements, accounting treatment, and policy debates to assess whether buy-backs serve as a legitimate corporate governance mechanism or merely as a financial engineering tool.

Keywords : Buy-back of shares; Companies Act, 2013; SEBI (Buy-Back of Securities) Regulations, 2018; Corporate governance; Shareholder value, Earnings per share,

MAJORITY MIGHT VS. MINORITY RIGHT: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF MINORITY SHAREHOLDER PROTECTION IN INDIAN CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

AUTHOR – ROHIT KUMAR, STUDENT AT AMITY LAW SCHOOL, AMITY UNIVERSITY

BEST CITATION – ROHIT KUMAR, MAJORITY MIGHT VS. MINORITY RIGHT: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF MINORITY SHAREHOLDER PROTECTION IN INDIAN CORPORATE GOVERNANCE, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (13) OF 2025, PG. 609-615, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344

Abstract

The doctrine of majority rule forms the cornerstone of corporate governance; however, its rigid application often results in the subjugation of minority shareholders. The Cyrus Mistry v. Tata Sons Ltd. (2021) judgment rekindled the debate on whether Indian company law effectively safeguards minority interests against oppression by dominant shareholders. This paper examines the legal, judicial, and policy framework governing minority shareholder protection in India. It analyzes the statutory provisions under the Companies Act, 2013—particularly Sections 241–246—alongside judicial interpretation from landmark cases. The research also compares the Indian regime with that of the United Kingdom to identify structural and procedural gaps. The findings reveal that despite progressive legislation, minority shareholders remain vulnerable due to procedural thresholds, limited access to remedies, and discretionary judicial approaches. The paper concludes by proposing reforms aimed at fostering equitable corporate governance through transparency, accountability, and participatory inclusivity.

Keywords

Minority Shareholders — Corporate Governance — Oppression and Mismanagement — Companies Act, 2013 — Shareholder Rights — Judicial Remedies — Comparative Analysis

PATENT LAW AND 3D PRINTING: LEGAL IMPLICATIONS AND CHALLENGES

AUTHOR – RAVI KUMAR, STUDENT AT AMITY UNIVERSITY, PATNA

BEST CITATION – RAVI KUMAR, PATENT LAW AND 3D PRINTING: LEGAL IMPLICATIONS AND CHALLENGES, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (13) OF 2025, PG. 602-608, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344

1. Abstract

The evolution of three-dimensional (3D) printing, also known as additive manufacturing, represents a transformative technological leap with profound implications for intellectual property law, particularly patent law. 3D printing enables individuals and enterprises to design and fabricate complex products directly from digital files, often bypassing traditional manufacturing and distribution channels. While this innovation fosters democratized production and creativity, it simultaneously raises intricate legal and ethical challenges concerning patent protection, ownership, infringement, and enforcement. Traditional patent systems were structured for a world of centralized production, physical goods, and traceable supply chains. The decentralized and digital nature of 3D printing challenges these foundational assumptions.This paper examines the dynamic intersection between patent law and 3D printing, exploring the legal implications and regulatory difficulties arising from this technology. It discusses patentability standards as applied to 3D printing technologies, ownership and inventorship questions, the detection and enforcement of patent infringement, and the tensions between open-source models and proprietary rights. It also reviews international legal frameworks, case precedents, and ethical dimensions that complicate the regulatory landscape.By evaluating global responses and potential reforms, the paper highlights the urgent need for adaptive patent frameworks that balance innovation incentives with accessibility and fairness. The study concludes that legal systems worldwide must evolve toward more technology-sensitive approaches that accommodate decentralized production and ensure equitable protection for inventors, consumers, and the broader public. Ultimately, 3D printing demands a rethinking of patent law’s traditional principles in an increasingly digital and collaborative manufacturing ecosystem.

RESERVATION AND THE RIGHT TO EQUALITY: A CONSTITUTIONAL DILEMMA

AUTHOR – TEJESHVI SRIVASTAV, STUDENT AT CITY LAW COLLEGE, CHINHUT

BEST CITATION – TEJESHVI SRIVASTAV, RESERVATION AND THE RIGHT TO EQUALITY: A CONSTITUTIONAL DILEMMA, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (13) OF 2025, PG. 595-601, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

ABSTRACT

Alright, so here‟s the deal: The Indian Constitution swears up and down that everyone gets equal treatment—yeah, that‟s Articles 14 to 18 for you. But then, in the same breath, it‟s like, “Oh, by the way, we‟re gonna give some folks a leg up because they‟ve been left behind socially or educationally.” Confused yet? „Cause honestly, that‟s where the mess starts. How can you say you‟re treating everyone the same while handing out special passes to some? This paper dives into that mess. We‟ll poke at the big court cases— remember Indra Sawhney v. Union of India? And the more recent EWS reservation drama? Judges have bent over backward trying to figure out what “equality” even means. The big question—are reservations actually leveling the playing field, or are they just making things more lopsided? In the end, the paper argues we have to walk a tightrope: help the folks falling behind, sure, but don‟t turn reservations into a forever free ride. Justice—not a permanent crutch.

Keywords: Article 14, EWS (Economically Weaker Section), Indra Sawhney case, Indian Constitution

PUBLIC LEGAL EDUCATION: A KEY TO JUSTICE FOR ALL

AUTHORS – ANANYA MITTAL & VANSHITA MALHOTRA

STUDENTS AT OP JINDAL GLOBAL UNIVERSITY

BEST CITATION – ANANYA MITTAL & VANSHITA MALHOTRA, POWER, PUBLIC LEGAL EDUCATION: A KEY TO JUSTICE FOR ALL, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (13) OF 2025, PG. 587-594, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

ABSTRACT

A fair justice system is meaningless if people cannot access it. Millions of people around the world are affected by a “justice gap,” which is the difference between what the law needs and what works. Marginalised communities are hit the hardest.  Public Legal Education (PLE) can help bridge this gap by giving individuals the knowledge and skills to understand their rights, navigate legal systems, and resolve disputes. This article looks at how PLE gives people power, builds trust in institutions, and stops exploitation by using examples from India, Canada, the UK, and global initiatives. It also examines the challenges of funding, outreach, and coordination, offering practical solutions such as technology-driven learning, school-based legal literacy, and public-private partnerships to make justice accessible to all.

MUSIC ROYALTIES, STREAMING PLATFORMS, AND THE FUTURE OF COPYRIGHT LAW

AUTHOR – AMBIKA RANI, STUDENT AT AMITY LAW SCHOOL/AMITY UNIVERSITY PATNA, BIHAR

BEST CITATION – AMBIKA RANI, POWER, MUSIC ROYALTIES, STREAMING PLATFORMS, AND THE FUTURE OF COPYRIGHT LAW, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (13) OF 2025, PG. 583-586, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

In the music industry, where creative output is both a cultural artifact and a commercial product, copyright law has long served as the legal basis for the protection and monetization of artistic expression. It guarantees that composers, lyricists, musicians, and other creative contributors maintain certain legal rights over their work, enabling them to manage the distribution, performance, and commercialization of their music. These rights, which allow musicians to make a living and reinvest in their craft, have historically been essential to preserving the financial sustainability of music production. However, the development of music distribution technology has significantly changed how royalty regimes function and how music is consumed. The emergence of digital music streaming has completely changed the industry’s economic structure, bringing with it both previously unheard-of worldwide access and serious issues with equitable remuneration. This change raises important concerns about whether existing copyright laws are sufficient to support creative work in a time when music is more accessible than ever before but frequently brings in startlingly little money for many of the artists who create it.

THE SCOPE OF MEDIATION AND ARBITRATION IN RESOLVING COPYRIGHT AND PATENT DISPUTES

AUTHOR – DIBYAM, STUDENT AT AMITY LAW SCHOOL/AMITY UNIVERSITY PATNA, BIHAR

BEST CITATION – DIBYAM, POWER, INEQUALITY, AND THE LAW: A SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE ON LEGAL SYSTEMS, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (13) OF 2025, PG. 575-582, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

Abstract

This essay explores the function, boundaries, and usefulness of mediation and arbitration—collectively, “alternative dispute resolution,” or ADR—in settling copyright and patent rights issues. It identifies the primary doctrinal and practical barriers (arbitrability, interim remedies, validity challenges, public policy), maps the domestic and international legal framework, reviews common-law and Indian jurisprudence, and makes recommendations for parties, practitioners, and policymakers to optimise the advantages of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in intellectual property disputes. Leading Indian rulings, institutional practice (WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Centre), primary tools (UNCITRAL Model Law; national arbitration statutes), and comparative commentary serve as the foundation for the examination. Parties are looking into alternatives to traditional litigation as copyright and patent rights conflicts have become more intense due to the growing globalisation of creative and technological markets. Due to their flexibility, anonymity, affordability, and capacity to include knowledgeable decision-makers, mediation and arbitration—collectively referred to as alternative dispute resolution (ADR)—have become appealing methods for settling such disputes. This essay explores the use of mediation and arbitration in copyright and patent disputes today, with an emphasis on its conceptual constraints, practicality, and legal viability.

Keywords

Intellectual property; arbitration; mediation; arbitrability; copyrights; patents; WIPO; UNCITRAL; India; interim relief; enforceability.

POWER, INEQUALITY, AND THE LAW: A SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE ON LEGAL SYSTEMS

AUTHOR – SIJAL SHRIYA, M.A SOCIOLOGY STUDENT AT VASANTA COLLEGE FOR WOMEN, BHU

BEST CITATION – SIJAL SHRIYA, POWER, INEQUALITY, AND THE LAW: A SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE ON LEGAL SYSTEMS, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (13) OF 2025, PG. 570-574, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

Abstract

​This article provides a sociological critique of the law, challenging the classical liberal ideal of justice as an impartial and neutral arbiter. From a sociological perspective, the law is presented not as a transcendent set of rules, but as a dynamic, human institution that is deeply embedded within society. The article argues that the law is fundamentally entangled with the distribution of power and is a primary mechanism through which social inequalities are structured, maintained, and legitimized. It explores this argument by contrasting foundational functionalist theories, which view law as a tool for social solidarity, with conflict theories, which see law as an instrument of the dominant class. The analysis further deconstructs legal neutrality by examining critical theories, including Critical Legal Studies (CLS), Feminist Jurisprudence, and Critical Race Theory (CRT), as well as the concept of intersectionality. The article also investigates the practical mechanisms of inequality in the “law in action,” such as differential access to justice and the discretion of legal actors. Finally, it concludes by framing the law as a “double-edged sword”: while it serves as a tool of power, it is also a crucial site of social struggle and a vital tool for legal mobilization and resistance.

Keywords – ​Sociology of Law, Power and Inequality, Legal Neutrality, Conflict Theory, Critical Legal Studies (CLS), Feminist Jurisprudence, Critical Race Theory (CRT), Intersectionality, Access to Justice, Legal Mobilization