India’s leading B2B marketplace has moved to court in a high-profile legal confrontation as IndiaMART has sued OpenAI alleging exclusion from ChatGPT search results. The case raises critical questions around platform neutrality, algorithmic transparency, and the growing influence of AI-driven search and discovery tools on digital businesses.
The lawsuit marks one of the first major legal challenges in India involving the commercial impact of generative AI platforms on established internet companies.
What the Lawsuit Against OpenAI Is About
According to the legal filing, IndiaMART claims that its platform is being unfairly excluded or underrepresented in ChatGPT search responses, despite being one of India’s largest and most established B2B marketplaces. The company argues that such exclusion negatively impacts visibility, traffic, and business opportunities, especially as users increasingly rely on AI tools for search and recommendations.
IndiaMART is reportedly seeking corrective measures, greater transparency in how sources are selected, and safeguards against discriminatory or opaque AI-driven outcomes.
Why ChatGPT Search Visibility Matters
As AI tools become an alternative to traditional search engines, appearing in ChatGPT-generated answers is increasingly valuable for digital platforms. For marketplaces and service aggregators, reduced visibility can directly affect user acquisition and revenue.
The lawsuit highlights concerns that AI-generated responses may concentrate attention on a limited set of sources, potentially disadvantaging platforms that depend on discovery and comparison.
IndiaMART’s Position
IndiaMART operates one of India’s largest online platforms connecting buyers and suppliers across industries. The company argues that exclusion from AI-driven search responses distorts competition and creates an uneven playing field, especially if users treat AI answers as neutral or comprehensive.
IndiaMART’s legal action reflects broader anxiety among digital platforms about how generative AI systems decide what content to surface.
OpenAI and the Role of ChatGPT
OpenAI develops ChatGPT, a generative AI model that provides conversational answers by drawing on licensed data, human-created content, and publicly available information. OpenAI has previously stated that ChatGPT does not function as a traditional search engine and does not intentionally rank or exclude specific businesses.
However, as AI tools increasingly overlap with search and discovery, legal scrutiny around their market impact is intensifying.
Broader Implications for AI and Competition
The case could have far-reaching consequences for how AI platforms operate in markets like India. If courts demand greater transparency or neutrality in AI-generated outputs, it may reshape how large language models reference companies, marketplaces, and services.
Legal experts note that this dispute sits at the intersection of competition law, technology regulation, and emerging AI governance frameworks.
Growing Global Scrutiny of AI Platforms
Globally, regulators and companies are questioning the power of AI systems to shape consumer choices. Lawsuits and policy debates are emerging around bias, dominance, and accountability in algorithmic systems.
The fact that IndiaMART sued OpenAI over ChatGPT search exclusion adds India to a growing list of jurisdictions where AI platforms are facing legal and regulatory challenges.
What Happens Next
The case will proceed through India’s legal system, where courts will examine whether AI-generated responses can be treated as a form of search or market access, and whether exclusion constitutes competitive harm.
The outcome could influence how AI platforms engage with businesses and how companies protect their digital visibility in an AI-first internet.
Conclusion
IndiaMART’s lawsuit against OpenAI marks a pivotal moment in the evolving relationship between AI platforms and digital marketplaces. As AI-driven tools increasingly shape how users find information, disputes over visibility, fairness, and accountability are likely to grow.
The case could set an important precedent for how generative AI systems are regulated and how businesses safeguard their presence in an AI-dominated discovery ecosystem.
