INTRODUCTION: THE RISE OF AI IN FASHION DESIGN
With the emergence and development of technology, there has been a major shift in various realms as new paths are adapted to bring effective and efficient development. In the fashion world, where trends are always in flux, technology has been a major influential factor in its development. Soon we are headed into an age when AI will be inextricably linked to every facet of human life.
But with AI advancements and since the explosion of generative AI powering systems like chat GPT there has been a true recognition of investment in AI fashion designs. Every Industry has to prepare for the future of work and the fashion industry is no different. AI can do a lot of things and has been playing a pivotal role in the fashion industry already. With the advancement of several programmers, it has been stated that it might soon replace the designers. By providing such a structure AI establishes deep learning models that can handle multiple complex tasks at the same time. Dozens of outfits designed with the help of AI by designers are now being showcased in Fashion catwalks with the use of image recognition detection and retention programs. But with such development several legal and ethical situations have emerged which have pointed out various complexities and challenges in AI Fashion Design and disputes to claim of ownership.
LEGAL FRAMEWORKS GOVERNING AI-GENERATED FASHION DESIGNS: NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES
Since the emergence of new developments in various sectors, it is very necessary to regulate them, one of them being the rise of AI-generated work, which includes fashion designs. New legal regulations and frameworks are being established to address the unique challenges posed by these innovations, both nationally and internationally.
National Laws And Legal Provisions Governing Ai-Generated Fashion Designs
In India laws governing AI are yet to be enacted but important legal oversight for AI – AI-generated fashion design could be seen link with several existing laws, including the Copyright Act 1957, which can be extended to protect AI-generated work. Section 2(d)(vi) defines the author of computer-generated works as the person causing the work to be created, which could include AI systems. Copyright infringement penalties include imprisonment of up to 3 years and fines ranging from ₹50,000 to ₹2,00,000 (Section 63).
The legal framework provided under Section 22 (2) by The Designs Act, 2000 includes penalties for piracy of registered designs. Secrecy Breaches are covered under section 119 of the Patents Act, of 1970. A sum of Rs. 1 crore has been imposed as a fine for the AI system if used by unauthorized access under the Information Technology Act 2000. Also, the new laws have influenced the Indian legal framework of Artificial Intelligence (AI) integration in fashion design which includes the the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), and the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA). BNS, set to replace the IPC, emphasizes accountability and addresses emerging challenges like cybercrime (Section 10), ensuring relevance to AI-generated designs. BNSS, replacing the CrPC, enhances procedural transparency and facilitates the incorporation of AI in investigations (Section 5). The BSA modernizes evidence law, specifically recognizing digital evidence and AI tools in forensic analysis (Section 3). These laws corroborate with each other to streamline the legal framework around AI applications, improve efficiency in evidence gathering, and safeguard human rights by setting clear guidelines for the ethical use of AI in the fashion industry, ensuring protection against bias and maintaining accountability in AI-driven decisions.
International Legal Frameworks Addressing AI-Generated Designs
Law governing AI-generated fashion Internationally has been ever-evolving rapidly. Bodies like UNESCO, the UN, and the African Union have been developing such global frameworks to address AI’s challenges, including bias, labour impact, and ethical concerns. The EU’s AI Act, a landmark law, categorizes AI systems based on risk, enforcing strict rules on high-risk AI applications while encouraging transparency and accountability. Meanwhile, the U.S. is advancing through executive orders promoting AI safety, security, and equity, with frameworks like the AI Bill of Rights guiding principles. China’s approach focuses on specific technologies, such as deepfakes and generative AI, with targeted regulations to safeguard national security. South Africa, Nigeria, and other African nations are building AI regulations through existing laws, while Australia is developing a comprehensive framework, learning from EU practices. The push for global AI standards is also gaining momentum with initiatives from the OECD, G20, and World Economic Forum, setting ethical benchmarks for AI governance. As AI-generated designs reshape fashion, these laws and frameworks ensure responsible use, protection of intellectual property, and equitable technological development across the globe.
CASE LAWS AND LEGAL DISPUTES IN AI-CREATED FASHION
The case of Thaler v. Comptroller General of Patents (UK), gives insight into whether AI can be named as an inventor for the patent claim. An Application was filed stating AI should be recognized as the sole inventor, but the UK patent office denied the claim and decided that the inventor must be a human. This gives rise to issues and debates over whether AI developers or fashion houses should claim ownership if AI cannot be recognized as an inventor, the right to AI-generated fashion design would default to the human or organization behind the AI, sidelining the contributions of AI in the creative process.
In the case of Infopaq International A/S v. Danske Dagblades Forening (CJEU) the European Court of Justice (CJEU) clarified the meaning of the word ‘originality’ under copyright law stating that a work must reflect the author’s intellectual creation. The basic idea that this case gives out is that fashion design produced by AI might not qualify for copyright if it lacks a human element.
The Australian DABUS Patent Application (2020) lays down a global context for AI as an Inventor as the case lays down the framework of the DABUS AI system which claimed to be the inventor in the patent application. Initially the Australian rejected the application but later ruled that AI could be recognised as an inventor under certain special circumstances. Under the realm of fashion law this this can impact the ownership of AI-generated fashion design ownership as certain jurisdictions might allow AI to be credited as a sole creator or co-creator.
POTENTIAL LEGAL CONFLICTS BETWEEN FASHION HOUSES AND AI DEVELOPERS
With the understanding of legal rights and liabilities, in today’s era, no person wants to be exploited and deprived of what they have worked upon, and this escalation of conflicts in the realm of the fashion industry is very common thus with the advancement of technology and use of AI a whole new set of regulations comes under the purview. Fashion houses and AI developers often face conflicts that include the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in Fashion production, marketing, and design. Fashion houses may own intellectual property rights in their designs, while AI developers may claim ownership of algorithms and models used to create these designs. It is when the AI-generated design infringes on existing copyright or trademark the conflicts escalate. To mitigate these risks, both parties may need to clarify ownership, licensing agreements, and contractual responsibilities. Understanding intellectual property laws and establishing clear guidelines is crucial to avoid legal disputes and ensure successful collaborations.
As AI systems create more original fashion designs, the risk of accidental infringement rises. AI may unintentionally replicate existing designs, but who is liable—the designer using the AI, the AI developer, or the fashion house? Current laws struggle to assign clear responsibility. Establishing clear liability frameworks is crucial to protecting both creators and users in an AI-driven fashion.
CONCLUSION
With time AI systems have been enhancing and thus more original fashion design creations have been growing, with this, the development in the realm of AI widened its landscape to the Fashion Industry, and it becomes very crucial to revolutionize its framework and thus to regulate such establishments of legal reforms becomes increasingly urgent and necessary. While some jurisdictions like the EU are pushing for stricter copyright and patent regulations, others are still exploring how to classify and protect AI-driven creations. The grey areas in the current laws are yet to be explored so that elements such as robust agreements are drafted with AI mechanisms for having a grip over infringement risks. Clear guidelines must be established to determine whether the rights to AI-created works lie with the developer, user, or commissioning brand. Hence the future of fashion law hinges on addressing these challenges to ensure fairness and innovation.
Author(s) Name: Akash Sharma (Goalpara Law College, Guwahati University)
