Current Affairs 19 May 2025
Content: Copyright’s Tryst with Generative AI What is a Presidential Reference? From Pyramids to Hourglasses: How AI Can Change Indian Workplaces ISRO: Satellite Launch Went Awry Minutes After Lift-Off Due to Glitch SC Directs States and UTs to Reclaim Reserve Forests Allotted to Private Parties Our Bodies Perform a Kind of mRNA Editing, and We Don’t Know Why PSLV: Centre of Attention Copyright’s tryst with generative AI Historical Context of Copyright Law Copyright law originated in 1710 due to the invention of the printing press. Its aim: protect publishers’ rights, encourage learning, and secure economic interests. Over time, it has adapted to photocopying, recording devices, and the Internet. Each technological shift brings debates on how copyright should respond. Relevance : GS 2(Governance) ,GS 3(Invention ,Technology) Generative AI: A New Challenge Current concern: generative AI trains on copyrighted material without permission. This shifts focus from “copying works” to “training on works.” Earlier legal concerns involved reproducing copies; now it involves usage in training datasets. Global Legal Crossroads Generative AI companies (like OpenAI) use internet scraping to collect both copyrighted and non-copyrighted content. Lawsuits have emerged globally: India: Federation of Indian Publishers & ANI sued OpenAI in Delhi HC. USA: Claims countered with “fair use in education” exceptions. OpenAI introduced an opt-out mechanism, but it only applies to future training, not past. India’s Unique Legal Landscape India follows an enumerated exceptions model under its Copyright Act. Unlike the U.S. “fair use” doctrine, India lists specific exceptions—limited scope. Educational use is confined to classroom settings—favouring right-holders in disputes. Indian courts may face jurisdictional challenges, but the core issue remains unresolved. Key Judicial Considerations Amicus curiae (Dr. Arul George Scaria) suggestions: Assess feasibility of “unlearning” content already used in training. Balance AI development with access to legitimate information. Address false attribution issues in AI responses. Concerns about Access and Equity Over-restriction may hurt access to books and knowledge—undermining copyright’s original intent. Newer, smaller AI players could suffer due to lack of access to high-quality training data. Courts must ensure a level playing field between dominant and emerging AI platforms. Foundational Copyright Principles as a Guide Copyright protects expression of ideas, not the idea/information itself. If AI uses information (not expression), it’s not necessarily infringement. Law should distinguish between: Learning from content (permissible) Copying protected expressions (infringement) Philosophical and Practical Implications All creativity—human or AI—is based on learning from the past. Creating a legal divide between human and machine learning may be counterproductive. Law must evolve but not at the cost of stifling creativity and future innovation. What is a Presidential reference? Constitutional Basis and Origin Article 143 empowers the President of India to refer questions of law or fact of public importance to the Supreme Court for its opinion. This is a non-binding, advisory opinion by the court. Originates from Section 213 of the Government of India Act, 1935. Relevance : GS 2(Polity and Governance) Comparative Perspective Canada: Has a similar provision; Supreme Court provides opinions on reference questions. USA: No advisory jurisdiction; advisory opinions are considered a violation of the separation of powers. Key Features of Article 143 The President acts on advice of the Council of Ministers while referring matters. Supreme Court may (not must) answer the reference. Requires a bench of at least five judges (as per Article 145). The opinion has persuasive value, not binding on the President or future courts. Important Precedents (Historical References) Delhi Laws Act case (1951): Validated delegated legislation. Kerala Education Bill (1958): Harmonized Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles. Berubari Case (1960): Territorial cession needs constitutional amendment. Keshav Singh Case (1965): Legislative privileges defined. Presidential Poll Case (1974): Elections can proceed despite vacancies. Special Courts Bill (1978): Court can decline vague references. Third Judges Case (1998): Defined the collegium system for judicial appointments. Court’s Discretion The Supreme Court is not bound to answer every Presidential reference. Has declined only once — in Ram Janmabhoomi case (1993). Current Presidential Reference (2024-25) Stems from a recent SC ruling that: Imposed timelines on Governors and the President for acting on Bills. Made their actions subject to judicial review. President Droupadi Murmu has raised 14 questions concerning: Interpretation of Articles 200 & 201. Judicial review of executive actions before enactment. The scope of Article 142 (extraordinary powers of the SC). Issue arises due to Centre-State tensions, especially with Opposition-ruled States. Core Issues Raised Can the Supreme Court prescribe timelines not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution? Are Governor/President’s decisions justiciable before a Bill becomes law? What is the extent of Article 142 powers? Broader Implications Touches upon separation of powers and federalism. May define boundaries of judicial activism in legislative processes. An authoritative opinion can ensure smooth Centre-State legislative functioning. Conclusion Presidential references serve as a constitutional dialogue between the executive and judiciary. The current reference may set important precedents on executive discretion, legislative processes, and judicial boundaries. From pyramids to hourglasses: how AI can change Indian workplaces Shift from Pyramid to Hourglass Model Traditional pyramid structure: Top-heavy with bosses, middle managers, and a broad base of workers. Hourglass structure: AI flattens the middle tier by automating coordination and decision-making tasks. Leaders focus on strategy, while the base comprises frontline workers and AI systems working collaboratively. Relevance : GS 2(Governance) ,GS 3(Technology) AI’s Economic Promise McKinsey projects AI could add trillions to the global economy. Potential to increase productivity by up to 25% for firms embracing AI. SMEs in India could significantly benefit due to the potential for efficiency and flexibility gains. Global Trends and India’s Context Western firms are already adopting hourglass models (e.g., 20% of firms may reduce middle managers by 2026). India’s scenario is unique: Ranks 72nd in IMF’s AI Preparedness Index. Urban-rural divide limits infrastructure and connectivity. Cultural hierarchy and respect for authority slow organizational flattening. India’s Hybrid Approach Indian firms are adapting selectively: Flipkart, Jio use AI for supply chain and customer behavior prediction but retain human layers for local adaptability. Hybrid model: AI + human oversight accommodates India’s multilingual, diverse market needs and low labor costs. Advantages of AI in Indian Workplaces Efficiency: AI-driven demand forecasting and supply chain optimization. Innovation: Generative AI improves task performance by 66% (NNG Group). Flexibility: AI helped pharma firms during pandemic disruptions. Customer/employee experience: 24/7 chatbots, automated payroll systems. New job roles: Rise in demand for AI experts, data ethicists — projected 1.25 million jobs by 2027 (Deloitte & Nasscom). Key Challenges Job Displacement: Risk to middle managers and less-skilled workers. Up to 800 million jobs may shift globally by 2030. Indian non-graduates and older workers most vulnerable. Reskilling Needs: While 94% of Indian firms plan to reskill (LinkedIn), execution remains challenging. Ethical Concerns: Biased datasets can affect fairness in decisions (loans, hiring). Data privacy: 79% of Indians dislike data being sold (ISACA). Digital Personal Data Protection Act (2023) still in early implementation. Infrastructure Gaps: 65% of India lives in rural areas, many without internet access. High costs of AI tools and platforms make it hard for smaller firms. Cultural Barriers: Preference for hierarchical structures in family-owned businesses and traditional companies. Recommendations Reskilling: Expand digital literacy and problem-solving training (e.g., through Skill India). Ethical Frameworks: Adopt clear AI ethics guidelines (OECD model), address bias and build public trust. Hybrid Strategy: Combine AI’s efficiency with human adaptability for decision-making. Collaborations: Partner with Western firms to develop customised AI for Indian needs. Long-term Monitoring: Treat AI as an ongoing transformation, not a quick fix — adapt to cyber threats and regulation changes. ISRO: satellite launch went awry minutes after lift-off due to glitch Mission objective: PSLV-C61 aimed to deploy Earth observation satellite EOS-09 into a sun synchronous polar orbit, 17 minutes post-lift-off. EOS-09 intended to support remote sensing applications with enhanced observation frequency, built on RISAT-1 heritage platform. Relevance : GS 3(Space ,Science and Technology) Failure details: The rocket lift-off was successful at 5:59 a.m. from Satish Dhawan Space Centre, Sriharikota. A technical glitch occurred during the third stage — a solid rocket motor — resulting in a drop in chamber pressure inside the motor casing. This pressure drop led to mission failure: the satellite was not placed into the intended orbit. Stages performance: First and second stages performed normally. Third stage started perfectly but encountered anomalies mid-operation causing the mission to abort. Context and history: PSLV-C61 was the 63rd flight of the Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle and the 27th in the PSLV-XL variant. Since 2017, PSLV had an excellent success record after only two prior failures (1993’s first mission and 2017’s 41st flight). The recent failure follows a January 2025 incident where ISRO failed to raise orbit of NVS-02 satellite due to valve malfunction, highlighting ongoing technical challenges. Technical challenges and response: The third-stage solid motor had a history of development difficulties and multiple failures, as highlighted by former ISRO Chairman S. Somanath. Despite unusual reappearance of issues, confidence remains high that the root cause will be identified and fixed promptly. Implications: The failure underscores the technical complexity and risk inherent in space missions, especially in critical propulsion stages. It may cause delays in satellite data availability for operational uses like remote sensing. ISRO’s resilience and iterative problem-solving will be key to sustaining its launch success momentum. Next steps: ISRO will conduct detailed analysis of the third-stage anomaly before resuming similar missions. Continued improvements in motor design and quality control are critical. Monitoring and learning from such failures contribute to overall strengthening of India’s space capabilities. SC directs States and UTs to reclaim reserve forests allotted to private parties Supreme Court directive: Chief Secretaries of States and Administrators of Union Territories (UTs) must form Special Investigation Teams (SITs). SITs to examine forest lands held by Revenue Departments that have been allotted to private parties for non-forest (non-afforestation) uses. Relevance : GS 3(Environmental Governance) Action required: Identify and reclaim reserve forest lands wrongly allotted to private individuals/entities. Repossess such lands and hand them over to the respective forest departments. Exceptions & compensations: If repossession is not in larger public interest, States/UTs must recover the cost of the land from private holders. Recovered funds must be used solely for forest development and afforestation. Timeframe: The entire exercise must be completed within one year from the judgment date. Land use: Going forward, such forest lands must only be used for afforestation and forest-related activities. Conversion to agricultural or commercial purposes is prohibited. Case reference: Judgment arose from the illegal allotment of 11.89 hectares of reserve forest land at Kondhwa Budruk, Pune (allotted in 1998 for agriculture and sold to a builder in 1999). Environmental Clearance given to the builder in 2007 was quashed as illegal. Court observations: Highlighted the nexus between politicians, bureaucrats, and builders driving illegal forest land conversion. Called this a “classic example” of misuse and commercialisation of precious forest resources. Legal implications: Sets a precedent reinforcing strict protection of reserve forests. Empowers forest departments and strengthens forest conservation enforcement. Broader significance: Aims to curb illegal deforestation and safeguard ecological balance. Ensures accountability of government officials and private parties in forest land misuse. Promotes sustainable development through forest restoration efforts. Next steps for States/UTs: Immediate formation of SITs and thorough audits of forest land allotments. Proactive repossession or cost recovery and forest department handover. Implementation monitoring by judiciary or relevant authorities to ensure compliance within the one-year deadline. Our bodies perform a kind of mRNA editing, and we don’t know why Basic concept: DNA is like a recipe book coding for proteins made from amino acids. Genes (recipes) are transcribed into mRNA, which ribosomes “read” to build proteins. mRNA letters (A, U, G, C) correspond to amino acids; “A” stands for adenosine. Relevance : GS 3(Science and Technology) What is A-to-I mRNA editing? ADAR enzymes convert adenosine (A) in mRNA to inosine (I). Ribosomes read inosine as guanine (G), causing changes in the protein sequence. This editing can alter protein function by changing amino acids. Why is it puzzling? DNA could directly encode G instead of A, but it doesn’t—mRNA editing adds complexity. For example, editing can convert stop codons (UAG, UGA) into a codon for tryptophan (UGG), allowing proteins to be longer. The purpose of this complicated mechanism is unclear. Recent study insights from Fusarium graminearum (a fungus): No A-to-I editing during vegetative (growth) stage on infected plants. Massive A-to-I editing (over 26,000 sites) during sexual reproduction stage. Focused on 71 genes with premature stop codons (PSC genes) “rescued” by editing. Deleting PSC genes affected fungus only during sexual stage, proving editing’s developmental role. Functional implications: Unedited versions of some PSC genes help resist environmental stress during vegetative growth, so direct DNA mutation (A→G) would be disadvantageous early on. Suggests evolutionary advantage in delaying editing until necessary for development. Evolutionary perspective: A-to-I editing may be a transitional evolutionary mechanism. Over time, more genes might depend on editing, making ADAR essential for gene expression. This could eventually lead to accumulation of G-to-A mutations in DNA “masked” by editing. Scientific challenge: Understanding the net evolutionary benefit of A-to-I editing is more complex than discovering its function. The mechanism adds a regulatory layer that seems unnecessarily complicated. Broader significance: mRNA editing adds flexibility to gene expression without permanent DNA changes. Can help organisms adapt protein function dynamically to developmental or environmental cues. Raises fundamental questions about genetic information processing and evolution. PSLV: centre of attention What is PSLV? PSLV = Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle, designed to launch satellites into sun-synchronous polar orbits (SSPO). It is a four-stage rocket with sequentially firing engines, shedding stages to reduce weight during ascent. Relevance : GS 3(Science and Technology) Technical specifications: First stage: Uses HTPB (hydroxyl-terminated polybutadiene) fuel, peak thrust ~4.8 MN; XL version adds 6 strap-on boosters for extra thrust. Second stage: Powered by Vikas engine using unsymmetrical dimethylhydrazine (fuel) and nitrogen tetroxide (oxidiser), thrust ~0.8 MN. Third stage: Uses HTPB fuel again. Fourth stage: Uses monomethylhydrazine and mixed oxides of nitrogen with two engines. PSLV-C61 mission specifics: Launched May 18, 2023, at 5:59 am carrying EOS-09 satellite intended for SSPO. Mission ended in failure due to a problem in the third stage. Cause of failure: ISRO chairman V. Narayanan revealed that chamber pressure in the third-stage motor casing dropped during flight. Loss of pressure led to mission failure. Next steps: ISRO is investigating the exact cause of pressure loss. Plans to reattempt the launch with a replacement EOS-09 satellite. Significance of PSLV: Workhorse rocket for ISRO, reliable for multiple types of missions (earth observation, navigation, interplanetary). XL configuration adds thrust capacity via boosters to carry heavier payloads. Despite rare failures, PSLV remains crucial to India’s space ambitions.