#FactCheck - AI-Generated Image Falsely Shared as ‘Border 2’ Shooting Photo Goes Viral

Pretext

On 20th October 2022, the Competition Commission of India (CCI) imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,337.76 crores on Google for abusing its dominant position in multiple markets in the Android Mobile device ecosystem, apart from issuing cease and desist orders. The CCI also directed Google to modify its conduct within a defined timeline.  Smart mobile devices need an operating system (OS) to run applications (apps) and programs. Android is one such mobile operating system that Google acquired in 2005. In the instant matter, the CCI examined various practices of Google w.r.t. licensing of this Android mobile operating system and various proprietary mobile applications of Google (e.g., Play Store, Google Search, Google Chrome, YouTube, etc.).

The Issue

Google was found to be misusing its dominant position in the tech market, and the same was the reason behind the penalty. Google argued about the competitive constraints being faced from Apple. In relation to understanding the extent of competition between Google’s Android ecosystem and Apple’s iOS ecosystem, the CCI noted the differences in the two business models, which affect the underlying incentives of business decisions. Apple’s business is primarily based on a vertically integrated smart device ecosystem that focuses on the sale of high-end smart devices with state-of-the-art software components. In contrast, Google’s business was found to be driven by the ultimate intent of increasing users on its platforms so that they interact with its revenue-earning service, i.e., online searches, which directly affects the sale of online advertising services by Google. It was seen that google had created a dominant position among the android phone manufacturers as they were made to have a set of google apps preinstalled in the device to increase the user’s dependency on google services. The CCI felt that Google had created a dominant position to which they replied that the same operations are done by Apple as well, to which the commission responded that apple is a phone and app manufacturer and they have Apple-owned apps in Apple devices only, but Google here in had made a pseudo mandate for android manufactures to have the google apps pre-installed which is, in turn, a possible way of disrupting the market equilibrium and violative of market practices. The CCI imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,337.76 for abusing its dominant position in multiple markets in India, CCI delineated the following five relevant markets in the present matter –

• The market for licensable OS for smart mobile devices in India
• The market for app store for Android smart mobile OS in India
• The market for general web search services in India
• The market for non-OS specific mobile web browsers in India
• The market for online video hosting platforms (OVHP) in India.

Supreme Courts Opinion

In October 2022, the Competition Commission of India (CCI) ruled that Google, owned by Alphabet Inc, exploited its dominant position in Android and told it to remove restrictions on device makers, including those related to the pre-installation of apps and ensuring exclusivity of its search. Google lost a challenge in the Supreme Court to block the directives, as the learned court refused to put a stay on the imposed penalty, further giving seven days to comply. The Supreme Court has said a lower tribunal—where Google first challenged the Android directives—can continue to hear the company’s appeal and must rule by March 31.

Counterpoint Research estimates that about 97% of 600 million smartphones in India run on Android. Apple has just a 3% share. Hoping to block the implementation of the CCI directives, Google challenged the CCI order in the Supreme Court by warning it could stall the growth of the Android ecosystem. It also said it would be forced to alter arrangements with more than 1,100 device manufacturers and thousands of app developers if the directives kick in. Google has been concerned about India’s decision as the steps are seen as more sweeping than those imposed in the European Commission’s 2018 ruling. There it was fined for putting in place what the Commission called unlawful restrictions on Android mobile device makers. Google is still challenging the record $4.3 billion fine in that case. In Europe, Google made changes later, including letting Android device users pick their default search engine, and said device makers would be able to license the Google mobile application suite separately from the Google Search App or the Chrome browser.

‍

Conclusion

As the world goes deeper into cyberspace, the big tech companies have more control over the industry and the markets, but the same should not turn into anarchy in the global markets. The Tech giants need to be made aware that compliance is the utmost duty for all companies, and enforcement of the law of the land will be maintained no matter what. Earlier India lacked policies and legislation to govern cyberspace, but in the recent proactive stance by the govt, a lot of new bills have been tabled, one of them being the Intermediary Rules 2021, which has laid down the obligations nand duties of the companies by setting up an intermediary in the country. Such bills coupled with such crucial judgments on tech giants will act as a test and barrier for other tech companies who try to flaunt the rules and avoid compliance.

In a recent ruling, a U.S. federal judge sided with Meta in a copyright lawsuit brought by a group of prominent authors who alleged that their works were illegally used to train Meta’s LLaMA language model. While this seems like a significant legal victory for the tech giant, it may not be so. Rather, this is a good case study for creators in the USA to refine their legal strategies and for policymakers worldwide to act quickly to shape the rules of engagement between AI and intellectual property.

The Case: Meta vs. Authors

In Kadrey v. Meta, the plaintiffs alleged that Meta trained its LLaMA models on pirated copies of their books, violating copyright law. However, U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria ruled that the authors failed to prove two critical things: that their copyrighted works had been used in a way that harmed their market and that such use was not “transformative.” In fact, the judge ruled that converting text into numerical representations to train an AI was sufficiently transformative under the U.S. fair use doctrine. He also noted that the authors’ failure to demonstrate economic harm undermined their claims. Importantly, he clarified that this ruling does not mean that all AI training data usage is lawful, only that the plaintiffs didn’t make a strong enough case.

Meta even admitted that some data was sourced from pirate sites like LibGen, but the Judge still found that fair use could apply because the usage was transformative and non-exploitative.

A Tenuous Win

Chhabria’s decision emphasised that this is not a blanket endorsement of using copyrighted content in AI training. The judgment leaned heavily on the procedural weakness of the case and not necessarily on the inherent legality of Meta’s practices.

Policy experts are warning that U.S. courts are currently interpreting AI training as fair use in narrow cases, but the rulings may not set the strongest judicial precedent. The application of law could change with clearer evidence of commercial harm or a more direct use of content. 

Moreover, the ruling does not address whether authors or publishers should have the right to opt out of AI model training, a concern that is gaining momentum globally.

Implications for India

The case highlights a glaring gap in India’s copyright regime: it is outdated. Since most AI companies are located in the U.S., courts have had the opportunity to examine copyright in the context of AI-generated content. India has yet to start. Recently, news agency ANI filed a case alleging copyright infringement against OpenAI for training on its copyrighted material. However, the case is only at an interim stage. The final outcome of the case will have a significant impact on the legality of these language models being able to use copyrighted material for training.

Considering that India aims to develop “state-of-the-art foundational AI models trained on Indian datasets” under the IndiaAI Mission, the lack of clear legal guidance on what constitutes fair dealing when using copyrighted material for AI training is a significant gap.  

Thus, key points of consideration for policymakers include: 

• Need for Fair Dealing Clarity: India’s fair-dealing provisions under the Copyright Act, 1957, are narrower than U.S. fair use. The doctrine may have to be reviewed to strike a balance between this law and the requirement of diverse datasets to develop foundational models rooted in Indian contexts. A parallel concern regarding data privacy also arises. 
• Push for Opt-Out or Licensing Mechanisms: India should consider whether to introduce a framework that requires companies to license training data or provide an opt-out system for creators, especially given the volume of Indian content being scraped by global AI systems.
• Digital Public Infrastructure for AI: India’s policymakers could take this opportunity to invest in public datasets, especially in regional languages, that are both high quality and legally safe for AI training.
• Protecting Local Creators: India needs to ensure that its authors, filmmakers, educators and journalists are protected from having their work repurposed without compensation, since power asymmetries between Big Tech and local creators can lead to exploitation of the latter.

Conclusion

The ruling in Meta’s favour is just one win for the developer. The real questions about consent, compensation and creative control remain unanswered. Meanwhile, the lesson for India is urgent: it needs AI policies that balance innovation with creator rights and provide legal certainty and ethical safeguards as it accelerates its AI ecosystem. Further, as global tech firms race ahead, India must not remain a passive data source; it must set the terms of its digital future. This will help the country move a step closer to achieving its goal of building sovereign AI capacity and becoming a hub for digital innovation.

References

• https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/jun/26/meta-wins-ai-copyright-lawsuit-as-us-judge-rules-against-authors 
• https://www.wired.com/story/meta-scores-victory-ai-copyright-case/ 
• https://www.cnbc.com/2025/06/25/meta-llama-ai-copyright-ruling.html 
• https://www.mondaq.com/india/copyright/1348352/what-is-fair-use-of-copyright-doctrine 
• https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2113095#:~:text=One%20of%20the%20key%20pillars,models%20trained%20on%20Indian%20datasets. ‍
• https://www.ndtvprofit.com/law-and-policy/ani-vs-openai-delhi-high-court-seeks-responses-on-copyright-infringement-charges-against-chatgpt

Executive Summary:

The internet is a nest of scams and there's much need to be careful with predatory ideas that prey on the naïve people. Within the recent days, a malicious campaign has emerged falsely alleging 28 day free recharge by courtesy of the Prime Minister Narendra Modi. This blog seeks to analyze the tactics used by this scam in luring the victims and give an overview on how one can identify and keep away from such fraudulent activities.

Claim:

In view of the increasing support for the BJP 2024 election, a rumor has allegedly claimed that the Prime Minister Narendra Modi offering a free recharge with a validity period of up-to twenty eight days at cost of ₹239  to all Indian users. The message encourages the users to click on a given link in order to redeem the free recharge, pointing out that this offer is valid until January 26th of 2024.

The Deceptive Journey:

• Insecure Links:The research begins with a suspicious link (http://offerintro[.]com/BJP2024), without any credibility that honest sites use to protect the user information. We should keep in mind that the links which aren’t secure may easily lead to phishing and other  cyber threats.
• Multiple Redirects:When users click the link, they are immediately directed through a series of links. This common tactic used by scammers is designed to hide the true origin of their fraudulent scheme, making it difficult for users' efforts to identify the malicious activity.
• False Promises and Fake Comments:The landing page has a banner of the Prime Minister Narendra Modi that makes it look like this is an official channel and hence authentic. Further, false comments can be also included to compliment the alleged initiative. But remember that genuine government announcements are made through legal channels, not by the shady websites.
• Mobile Number Request:As the next step, the users enter their mobile numbers in the specified field. True initiatives never really need the personal information to pass through unofficial lines. This is actually a trick that scammers use to acquire the important information.
• Share to Activate:Once a user has entered the mobile number, he/she is prompted to share the link with others in order to “activate” promised free recharge. This method is most often used by scammers for spreading their fraudulent message beyond the targeted victim.
• Fake Progress Display:When the users have done their part by sharing the link, a false recharge in progress  bar is shown to make them believe that it has started. But the consumers are unwittingly playing a part in the fraud.
• Recharge Completion Pop-up:The last stage of fraud includes a pop-up saying that the recharge is done; leaving users with the false belief that they have benefited from a legitimate government initiative.

What we Analyze :

• It is important to note that at this particular point, there has not been any official declaration or a proper confirmation of an offer made by the Prime Minister or from their government. So, people must be very careful when encountering such messages because they are often employed as lures in phishing attacks or misinformation campaigns. Before engaging or transmitting such claims, it is always advisable to authenticate the information from trustworthy sources in order to protect oneself online and prevent the spread of wrongful information.
• The campaign is hosted on a third party domain instead of any official Government Website, this raised suspicion. Also the domain has been registered in very recent times.

‍

‍

• Domain Name: offerintro[.]com
• Registry Domain ID: 2791466714_DOMAIN_COM-VRSN
• Registrar WHOIS Server: whois.godaddy[.]com
• Registrar URL: https://www.godaddy[.]com
• ‍Registrar: GoDaddy[.]com, LLC
• Registrar IANA ID: 146
• Updated Date: 2023-06-18T20:37:20Z
• Creation Date: 2023-06-18T20:37:20Z
• Registrar Registration Expiration Date: 2024-06-18T20:37:20Z
• Name Server: ANAHI.NS.CLOUDFLARE.COM
• Name Server: GARRETT.NS.CLOUDFLARE.COM

CyberPeace Advisory:

• Stay Informed: Beware of the scams and keep yourself updated through authentic government platforms.
• Verify Website Security: Do not get engaged with any insecure HTTP links but focus on URLs that have secure encryption (HTTPS).
• Protect Personal Information: However, be cautious when sharing personal information – especially in a non-official channel.
• Report Suspicious Activity: If you discover any scams or fraudulent activities, report it and the relevant sites to help avoid others from being defrauded of their hard earned money.

Conclusion:

Summing up, Prime Minister Narendra Modi Free Recharge fraud is an excellent illustration that there is always some danger within cyberspace. The way of the method, from insecure links and also multiple redirects to false promises and really data collection make it clear that internet users should be more careful. The importance of staying up-to-date with what is happening in this new digital world, verifying credibility and also privacy are paramount. By being cautiously aware, the people can keep themselves safe from such fraudulent acts and also play a role in ensuring security even for an online world. Remember that an offer which is in a perfect world should be illegal. Therefore, after doing a thorough research we found this campaign to be fake.

‍