Artificial intelligence's rapid integration with intellectual property rights necessitates assessment of its impact on trade secrets, copyrights and patents. This study addresses lacunae in existing laws where India lacks AI-specific provisions, creating doctrinal inconsistencies and enforcement inefficacies. Global discourse on AI-IPR protections remains nascent. The research identifies gaps in Indian IP laws' adaptability to AI-generated outputs: trade secret protection is inadequate against AI threats; standardized inventorship criteria are absent. Employing doctrinal and comparative methodology, it scrutinizes legislative texts, judicial precedents and policy instruments across India, US, UK and EU. Preliminary findings reveal shortcomings: India's contract law creates fragmented trade secret regime; Section 3(k) of Indian Patents Act blocks AI invention patenting; copyright varies in authorship attribution. The study proposes harmonized legal taxonomy accommodating AI's role while preserving innovation incentives. India's National AI Strategy (2024) shows progress but legislative clarity is imperative. This contributes to global discourse with AI-specific IP protections ensuring resilience and equitable innovation. Promising results underscore recalibrating India's IP jurisprudence for global alignment.

翻译：人工智能与知识产权的快速融合亟需评估其对商业秘密、版权和专利的影响。本研究针对现行法律中的空白展开探讨，印度缺乏专门的人工智能条款，导致理论体系不一致与执法效能不足。全球关于人工智能知识产权保护的讨论仍处于起步阶段。本研究识别出印度知识产权法律在适应人工智能生成成果方面存在的缺陷：商业秘密保护不足以应对人工智能威胁；缺乏标准化的发明人认定标准。通过运用理论分析与比较研究方法，本研究系统审视了印度、美国、英国及欧盟的立法文本、司法判例与政策工具。初步研究结果揭示若干不足：印度合同法形成碎片化的商业秘密保护体系；《印度专利法》第3(k)条款阻碍人工智能发明的专利授权；版权领域在作者归属方面存在差异。本研究提出协调统一的法律分类体系，在维护创新激励的同时容纳人工智能的角色。印度《国家人工智能战略（2024）》显示出进展，但立法层面的明确性仍至关重要。本研究通过构建人工智能专门知识产权保护机制以增强体系韧性与创新公平性，为全球讨论作出贡献。积极的研究成果凸显了重新调整印度知识产权司法体系以实现全球协调的必要性。