You can access the original order from here
The Calcutta High Court on May 20 refused to direct OpenAI to surface IndiaMart links in ChatGPT responses. Justice Ravi Krishan Kapur dismissed IndiaMart InterMesh Ltd’s interim relief application, finding no prima facie case and holding that the balance of convenience against granting any order. This reverses the court’s December 2025 order, where the same judge found a “strong prima facie case” of selective discrimination and said IndiaMart was excluded “without any logic.” After hearing OpenAI, that view did not hold.
Why it matters: India has 100 million weekly ChatGPT users, the second largest base globally. This is the first Indian court ruling on whether a business has legal recourse when an AI platform silently excludes it. The answer, for now, is no.
“AI systems are not merely ranking links. They are actively constructing the consumer’s informational universe,” said Navneet Sharma, VB Padode Chair Professor of Competition Policy at Vijaybhoomi University and Advisor (Governance and Policy) at Helicon Consulting.
“Once AI assistants become the primary discovery interface for products, suppliers, and commercial information, exclusion from their outputs can materially affect market access. The issue is no longer merely ‘speech’ or ‘search’; it is one of platform neutrality and competitive neutrality,” Sharma added.
IndiaMart’s allegations:
- ChatGPT bypassed IndiaMart and linked directly to individual supplier websites, cutting off discovery for 8.3 million registered suppliers and 42 million buyers.
- DHGate, Pinduoduo, Shopee, and Taobao, all named on the same United States Trade Representative (USTR) Notorious Markets List, continued appearing on ChatGPT, making the exclusion selectively discriminatory.
- OpenAI did not address India’s Ministry of Consumer Affairs clarification that USTR reports carry no binding force in India before excluding IndiaMart.
- The exclusion happened without notice, hearing, or an independent assessment.
OpenAI’s defence: OpenAI argued IndiaMart had no legal right under contract, statute, or constitutional law to demand visibility on ChatGPT. Its exclusion decision relied on the USTR’s 2024 Notorious Markets List, an annual American trade watchlist that flags markets alleged to facilitate intellectual property (IP) violations. It carries no legal force in India, and listed entities receive no notice or opportunity to respond before being named.
Sharma called this a digital sovereignty concern: “If global AI platforms operationalise foreign governmental risk classifications into discoverability rules, they effectively become private instruments of extraterritorial regulatory influence. That raises concerns of competitive neutrality and procedural fairness for Indian businesses.
“Particularly troubling is the allegation that similarly situated foreign marketplaces allegedly remained…
Source link
Disclaimer
We strive to uphold the highest ethical standards in all of our reporting and coverage. We blogs.grocliq.com want to be transparent with our readers about any potential conflicts of interest that may arise in our work. It’s possible that some of the investors we feature may have connections to other businesses, including competitors or companies we write about. However, we want to assure our readers that this will not have any impact on the integrity or impartiality of our reporting. We are committed to delivering accurate, unbiased news and information to our audience, and we will continue to uphold our ethics and principles in all of our work. Thank you for your trust and support.
Website Upgradation is going on for any glitch kindly connect at [email protected]
