Copyright Lawsuits Against OpenAI and Microsoft Consolidated in New York Federal Court

OpenAI copyright lawsuits from authors, New York Times consolidated in Manhattan

April 3 (Reuters) - A U.S. judicial panel decided on Thursday to consolidate in New York several copyright cases brought by prominent authors and news outlets against OpenAI and its largest backer Microsoft (MSFT.O), opens new tab. The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation's order, opens new tab moves California lawsuits brought by Ta-Nehisi Coates, comedian Sarah Silverman and other writers to Manhattan federal court to be joined with similar cases from news publications including The New York Times (NYT.N), opens new tab and authors including John Grisham, Jonathan Franzen and George R.R. Martin. OpenAI proposed consolidating the cases in northern California, while most of the plaintiffs opposed centralizing the cases. "We welcome this development and look forward to making it clear in court that our models are trained on publicly available data, grounded in fair use, and supportive of innovation," an OpenAI spokesperson said. New York Times attorney Steven Lieberman of Rothwell Figg said the company looked forward to "continuing to prove in New York that Microsoft and OpenAI committed widespread theft" of its work. A Microsoft spokesperson declined to comment on the decision. Attorneys and representatives for the authors did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The cases are part of a wave of high-stakes litigation against tech companies including OpenAI, Microsoft and Meta Platforms from copyright owners who allege that the companies used their material without permission to train AI systems. Judges are just beginning to consider whether the tech companies are immune from the allegations based on U.S. copyright law's "fair use" doctrine, which allows for the unauthorized use of copyrighted works in some circumstances. OpenAI asked the panel last year to combine 12 lawsuits from writers and news outlets into a single case for pretrial proceedings, arguing that they stemmed from "the same underlying allegations: that OpenAI used plaintiffs' copyrighted works to train certain large language models." The plaintiffs argued that their cases were too different to justify centralizing them. The panel said on Thursday that joining the cases before U.S. District Judge Sidney Stein would "serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient conduct of this litigation." Stein currently presides over the New York cases brought by the authors and the Times. Read more: Tech companies face tough AI copyright questions in 2025 NY court rejects authors' bid to block OpenAI cases from NYT, others Reporting by Blake Brittain in Washington Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab Suggested Topics:Litigation Blake Brittain Thomson Reuters Blake Brittain reports on intellectual property law, including patents, trademarks, copyrights and trade secrets, for Reuters Legal. He has previously written for Bloomberg Law and Thomson Reuters Practical Law and practiced as an attorney.

US authors' copyright lawsuits against OpenAI and Microsoft combined in New York with newspaper actions

California cases over AI trainers' use of work by writers including Ta-Nehisi Coates and Michael Chabon transferred to consolidate with New York suits from John Grisham and Jonathan Franzen and more Twelve US copyright cases against OpenAI and Microsoft have been consolidated in New York, despite most of the authors and news outlets suing the companies being opposed to centralisation. A transfer order made by the US judicial panel on multidistrict litigation on Thursday said that centralisation will "allow a single judge to coordinate discovery, streamline pretrial proceedings, and eliminate inconsistent rulings". Cases brought in California by prominent authors including Ta-Nehisi Coates, Michael Chabon, Junot Díaz and the comedian Sarah Silverman will be transferred to New York and joined with cases brought by news outlets, including the New York Times, and other authors including John Grisham, George Saunders, Jonathan Franzen and Jodi Picoult. Most of the plaintiffs opposed consolidation, arguing that their cases were too different to be combined. However, the transfer order states that the cases "share factual questions arising from allegations that OpenAI and Microsoft used copyrighted works, without consent or compensation, to train their large language models (LLMs) ... which underlie defendants' generative artificial intelligence products" such as OpenAI's ChatGPT and Microsoft's Copilot. OpenAI had proposed consolidating the cases in northern California. The judicial panel ultimately transferred the cases to the southern district of New York, stating that centralisation would "serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses" and "promote the just and efficient conduct of this litigation". "Given the novel and complicated nature of the technology, there likely will be overlapping experts" across the cases, read the order. Consolidation will "conserve the resources of the parties, their counsel and the judiciary". Tech companies have argued that their use of copyrighted works to train AI is permitted under the doctrine of "fair use", allowing the unauthorised use of copyrighted works under certain circumstances. An OpenAI spokesperson said: "We welcome this development and look forward to making it clear in court that our models are trained on publicly available data, grounded in fair use, and supportive of innovation," reported Reuters. Many of the prominent authors suing OpenAI have also sued Meta for copyright infringement in its training of AI models. A January court filing by Coates, Silverman and Díaz among others alleged that Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg approved the company's use of a notorious "shadow library", LibGen, which contains more than 7.5m books. On Thursday, authors gathered outside the Meta offices in London to protest the company's use of copyrighted books. Placards at the demonstration included "Get the Zuck off our books" and "I'd write a better sign but you'd just steal it", according to trade magazine the Bookseller. Thursday also saw Amazon confirm that a new Kindle feature, "Recaps", offering users refreshers on storylines and character arcs of a book series to review before they pick up the next book, will be AI-generated. "We use technology, including GenAI and Amazon moderators, to create short recaps of books that accurately reflect book content," Amazon spokesperson Ale Iraheta told TechCrunch. "By adding a new level of convenience to series reading, the Recaps feature enables readers to dive deeper into complex worlds and characters without losing the joy of discovery, all while ensuring an uninterrupted reading experience across every genre," wrote the company in a blogpost. However, Reddit users raised concerns about the accuracy of AI-generated summaries. Earlier this week, it emerged that the UK government is trying to placate peer and Labour backbencher concerns about its copyright proposals - which involve allowing AI companies to train models on copyrighted materials unless rights holders opt out - by pledging to assess the economic impact of the plans.

OpenAI copyright lawsuits from New York Times, authors consolidated in Manhattan

A US judicial panel decided on Thursday to consolidate in New York several copyright cases brought by prominent authors and news outlets against OpenAI and its largest backer Microsoft. The US Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation's order moves California lawsuits brought by Ta-Nehisi Coates, comedian Sarah Silverman and other writers to Manhattan federal court to be joined with similar cases from news publications including The New York Times and authors including John Grisham, Jonathan Franzen and George R.R. Martin. OpenAI proposed consolidating the cases in northern California, while most of the plaintiffs opposed centralizing the cases. "We welcome this development and look forward to making it clear in court that our models are trained on publicly available data, grounded in fair use, and supportive of innovation," an OpenAI spokesperson said. Representatives and attorneys for Microsoft, the Times and the authors did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the decision. The cases are part of a wave of high-stakes litigation against tech companies including OpenAI, Microsoft and Meta Platforms from copyright owners who allege that the companies used their material without permission to train AI systems. Judges are just beginning to consider whether the tech companies are immune from the allegations based on US copyright law's "fair use" doctrine, which allows for the unauthorized use of copyrighted works in some circumstances. OpenAI asked the panel last year to combine 12 lawsuits from writers and news outlets into a single case for pretrial proceedings, arguing that they stemmed from "the same underlying allegations: that OpenAI used plaintiffs' copyrighted works to train certain large language models." The plaintiffs argued that their cases were too different to justify centralizing them. The panel said on Thursday that joining the cases before US District Judge Sidney Stein would "serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient conduct of this litigation." Stein currently presides over the New York cases brought by the authors and the Times.

Copyright Lawsuits Against OpenAI and Microsoft Consolidated in New York | PYMNTS.com

A series of copyright lawsuits filed by prominent authors and major news outlets against artificial intelligence developer OpenAI and its key investor Microsoft will now be heard in New York, following a decision by a U.S. judicial panel on Thursday. According to Reuters, the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation ordered the consolidation of multiple legal actions -- including those filed in California by figures such as writer Ta-Nehisi Coates and comedian Sarah Silverman -- into the federal court in Manhattan. These suits will now proceed alongside existing cases in New York brought by other high-profile plaintiffs, including The New York Times and renowned authors like John Grisham, Jonathan Franzen, and George R.R. Martin. The panel's decision represents a key procedural development in a growing wave of litigation targeting tech companies that use large-scale data to train generative AI models. Per Reuters, plaintiffs argue that OpenAI and Microsoft used copyrighted material without authorization, violating intellectual property laws in the process. OpenAI had pushed to have the lawsuits consolidated in Northern California, where the company is based. However, most plaintiffs opposed the move, citing significant differences in the individual cases. Despite these objections, the panel ruled that centralizing the cases in New York would "serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient conduct of this litigation." Related: UK Watchdog Ends Probe into Microsoft-OpenAI Partnership "We welcome this development and look forward to making it clear in court that our models are trained on publicly available data, grounded in fair use, and supportive of innovation," an OpenAI spokesperson said in a statement. Meanwhile, The New York Times attorney, Steven Lieberman of Rothwell Figg, reaffirmed the company's stance, stating it looked forward to "continuing to prove in New York that Microsoft and OpenAI committed widespread theft" of its content. Microsoft declined to comment on the panel's ruling. As Reuters notes, the lawsuits are part of broader legal scrutiny facing companies like OpenAI, Microsoft, and Meta Platforms over the use of proprietary material in AI development. Courts are now grappling with whether such use falls under the "fair use" doctrine -- a provision of U.S. copyright law that permits limited use of protected works without permission under certain conditions. OpenAI previously argued that the lawsuits share a common foundation, specifically allegations that its large language models were trained on copyrighted works without consent. Plaintiffs, on the other hand, claimed their cases vary widely and should be evaluated independently. The consolidated cases will now proceed under the supervision of U.S. District Judge Sidney Stein, who is expected to oversee pretrial matters and guide the complex litigation forward.