Federal Judge Allows New York Times' Copyright Lawsuit Against OpenAI to Proceed

Judge allows newspaper copyright lawsuit against OpenAI to proceed

NEW YORK (AP) -- A federal judge has ruled that The New York Times and other newspapers can proceed with a copyright lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft seeking to end the practice of using their stories to train artificial intelligence chatbots. U.S. District Judge Sidney Stein of New York on Wednesday dismissed some of the claims made by media organizations but allowed the bulk of the case to continue, possibly to a jury trial. "The claims the court has dismissed do not undermine the main thrust of our case, which is that these companies have stolen our work and violated our copyright in a way that fundamentally damages our business," said a statement from Frank Pine, executive editor of MediaNews Group and Tribune Publishing, owners of some of the newspapers that are part of a consolidated lawsuit in a Manhattan court. Stein didn't explain the reasons for his ruling, saying that would come "expeditiously." OpenAI said in a statement it welcomed "the court's dismissal of many of these claims and look forward to making it clear that we build our AI models using publicly available data, in a manner grounded in fair use, and supportive of innovation." Microsoft declined to comment. The Times has said OpenAI and its business partner Microsoft have threatened its livelihood by effectively stealing billions of dollars worth of work by its journalists, in some cases spitting out Times' material verbatim to people who seek answers from generative artificial intelligence like OpenAI's ChatGPT. -- -- -- -- -- The Associated Press and OpenAI have a licensing and technology agreement that allows OpenAI access to part of AP's text archives.

Judge allows 'New York Times' copyright case against OpenAI to go forward

A federal judge on Wednesday rejected OpenAI's request to toss out a copyright lawsuit from The New York Times that alleges that the tech company exploited the paper's content without permission or payment. In an order allowing the lawsuit to go forward, Judge Sidney Stein, of the Southern District of New York, narrowed the scope of the lawsuit, but allowed the case's main copyright infringement claims to go forward. Stein did not immediately release an opinion but promised one would come "expeditiously." The decision is a victory for the newspaper, which has joined forces with other publishers, including The New York Daily News and the Center for Investigative Reporting, to challenge the way OpenAI collected vast amounts of data from the web in order to train its popular artificial intelligence service ChatGPT. Lawyers for The Times believe that the paper's articles are one of the biggest sources of copyrighted text OpenAI used to build ChatGPT into the premiere AI chatbot, and allege that OpenAI violated copyright laws in its siphoning of the newspaper's journalism. The Times and OpenAI did not immediately return requests for comment. OpenAI leaders have argued that the company's mass data scraping, including articles from The Times, is protected under a legal doctrine known as "fair use." It allows for material to be reused without permission in certain instances, including for research, teaching and commentary. The judge's ruling means that the suit can now proceed to trial, but a trial date has not been set. Evidence-gathering, including depositions with executives on both sides of the case, are expected to happen confidentially, along with public pre-trial hearings to settle disputes over evidence and other matters. The legal fight between one of the world's most influential news outlets and Silicon Valley's leading AI company puts a lot on the line for both the news industry and the future of AI tools. For publishers, the fear is that powerful chatbots that can quickly summarize news articles when queried will mean that readers visit news websites less often, prompting a drop in advertising that could affect the industry's bottom line. And while the suit only names OpenAI and its financial backer, Microsoft, other AI companies also scrape the web for content to train their models. For the most part, the AI industry has followed OpenAI's lead when it comes to training chatbot and other AI services, operating under the premise that processing data found on the open web into chatbot answers is legally protected by copyright law. But the law remains unsettled on the matter. Courts have said fair use of a copyrighted work must generate something new that is "transformative," or comments on or refers back to an original work. The Times argues that this does not apply to how OpenAI reproduces the paper's original reporting. Another part of the legal analysis will involve an idea known as "market substitution," referring to whether chatbot answers are a substitute for, say, reading The Times website, or if chatbots and newspapers operate in different marketplaces. In a hearing in New York in January, lawyers for the publishers argued that when ChatGPT was asked questions about subjects covered by The Times, the chatbot regurgitated articles verbatim. Yet OpenAI's legal team shot back that the news outlets appeared to have specifically manipulated prompts to essentially force the chatbot to spit out large chunks lifted from the paper's website. This is not how most people interact with the service, nor how the chatbot is designed to operate, said Joseph Gratz, a lawyer for OpenAI. "This isn't a document retrieval system. It is a large language mode," Gratz said.

NYT case against OpenAI and Microsoft can advance

Why it matters: The ruling allows most of the Times' case against OpenAI and Microsoft to proceed, paving the way for a possible trial. Between the lines: The two tech firms never challenged the Times' claims of direct copyright infringement, which alleged they copied the Times' works to train their large language models. Catch up quick: The New York Times sued OpenAI and Microsoft for copyright infringement in late 2023, becoming the first major news publisher to sue AI firms to protect its intellectual property. Zoom in: In his ruling last week, Judge Sidney Stein of the Southern District of New York denied several of OpenAI's motions to dismiss parts of the Times' lawsuit, including its request to dismiss copyright claims related to works older than three years and its request to dismiss claims that they were indirectly liable for copyright infringement. The big picture: AI companies that scraped online materials to train their models argue public data is "fair use" under existing copyright law. What's next: After the discovery phase of the case is complete, all parties will submit argument briefs for a summary judgement that a judge will rule on to decide whether the case proceeds to a jury trial. If the judge rules against the Times, it will have the right to appeal.

Lawsuit against OpenAI over newspaper copyright issues can proceed, judge rules

A federal judge has ruled that The New York Times and other newspapers can proceed with a copyright lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft seeking to end the practice of using their stories to train artificial intelligence chatbots. U.S. District Judge Sidney Stein of New York on Wednesday dismissed some of the claims made by media organizations but allowed the bulk of the case to continue, possibly to a jury trial. "We appreciate Judge Stein's careful consideration of these issues," New York Times attorney Ian Crosby said in a statement. "As the order indicates, all of our copyright claims will continue against Microsoft and Open AI for their widespread theft of millions of The Times's works, and we look forward to continuing to pursue them." The judge's ruling also pleased Frank Pine, executive editor of MediaNews Group and Tribune Publishing, owners of some of the newspapers that are part of a consolidated lawsuit in a Manhattan court. "The claims the court has dismissed do not undermine the main thrust of our case, which is that these companies have stolen our work and violated our copyright in a way that fundamentally damages our business," Pine said a statement. Stein didn't explain the reasons for his ruling, saying that would come "expeditiously." OpenAI said in a statement it welcomed "the court's dismissal of many of these claims and look forward to making it clear that we build our AI models using publicly available data, in a manner grounded in fair use, and supportive of innovation." Microsoft declined to comment. The Times has said OpenAI and its business partner Microsoft have threatened its livelihood by effectively stealing billions of dollars worth of work by its journalists, in some cases spitting out Times' material verbatim to people who seek answers from generative artificial intelligence like OpenAI's ChatGPT.

New York judge allows New York Times copyright lawsuit against OpenAI to proceed - SiliconANGLE

New York judge allows New York Times copyright lawsuit against OpenAI to proceed A federal judge in New York today rejected OpenAI's bid to dismiss a copyright lawsuit brought by The New York Times accusing the company of scraping data from its content to train its products. U.S. District Judge Sidney Stein narrowed the scope of the case, but the core of the copyright infringement claim will remain. No opinion was given, but Stein said one would come "expeditiously." The decision will delight the Times, The New York Daily News, and the Center for Investigative Reporting, which have joined forces on the lawsuit. "We appreciate Judge Stein's careful consideration of these issues," Times' attorney Ian Crosby said in a statement. "As the order indicates, all of our copyright claims will continue against Microsoft and Open AI for their widespread theft of millions of The Times's works, and we look forward to continuing to pursue them." The Times' lawyers claim the vast trove of content in the newspaper's database has been one of the major sources of data that has trained products such as ChatGPT. The lawsuit states that OpenAI has been "free-riding" on the Times' "significant efforts and investment of human capital to gather this information", without paying compensation. On the other side of the argument, OpenAI's attorneys state that the mass scraping of data amounts to "fair use." This is a legal framework wherein copyrighted material can be used without having to seek permission. Generative AI companies have built fortunes on the back of this doctrine, although what counts as fair is still up for debate. If it turns out the OpenAI's scraping doesn't meet the criteria for fair use, it could get expensive, with the statutory maximum for each willful violation being $150,000. It will also have a profound impact on all other generative AI firms that have also developed products on the back of content available online. What constitutes fair use is the question at hand, with the law stating that work can be reproduced in part but it must be "transformative," adding something new or at least referring to the original work. The case will also revolve around "market substitution," asking if the chatbot is a substitute for reading the content produced by the newspaper. The Times' lawyers have argued that ChatGPT has offered responses identical to articles in the Times, while OpenAI has argued that this was achieved only when the chatbot was manipulated. Publishers presently live with the threat that their content going forward will be summarized by ChatGPT-like products, leaving their audience walking out of the door and so collapsing their ad revenue. Meanwhile, a handful of other media giants have opted to be compensated for their work through licensing deals. In a statement, OpenAI said it welcomed "the court's dismissal of many of these claims and look forward to making it clear that we build our AI models using publicly available data, in a manner grounded in fair use, and supportive of innovation."

NYT lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft goes ahead with caveats

The judge dismissed some of the claims brought by the three plaintiffs who joined forces to challenge OpenAI and Microsoft. A federal judge in the Southern District Court of New York has allowed New York Times' copyright lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft to go ahead. Although, several of the publication's claims have been dismissed. The US media outlet filed the lawsuit against AI juggernaut OpenAI and its biggest backer Microsoft back in 2023 over claims that AI chatbots, including ChatGPT, are trained on millions of articles it published. "Defendants seek to free-ride on The Times's massive investment in its journalism by using it to build substitutive products without permission or payment," the New York Times alleged. Later, the publication joined forces with The New York Daily News and the Centre for Investigative Reporting (CIR) to challenge industry giants. The defendants, however, sought to dismiss many of their claims, including alleged copyright infringement, claims that they flouted the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act and claims of abridgement brought on by CIR. In its own lawsuit filed in 2024, CIR claimed that OpenAI and Microsoft "copied, used, abridged and displayed" its content without permission or compensation. After a hearing held in January this year, yesterday (26 March) judge Sidney Stein denied OpenAI and Microsoft's motion to dismiss direct and contributory infringement and claims of trademark dilution, among others. However, in a brief respite for the defendants, the court dismissed CIR's abridgement claims, along with claims that OpenAI removed author information from plaintiffs' journalistic work it "copied". Representing the news publishers, attorney Steven Lieberman told outlets that they appreciated the opportunity to present "facts about how OpenAI and Microsoft are profiting wildly from stealing the original content of newspapers across the country". While OpenAI spokesperson Jason Deutrom said the company welcomed the judge's narrowing of the case and told NPR they "look forward to making it clear" that the company builds its AI models using "publicly available data, in a manner grounded in fair use and supportive of innovation". Don't miss out on the knowledge you need to succeed. Sign up for the Daily Brief, Silicon Republic's digest of need-to-know sci-tech news.

The 'New York Times''s copyright lawsuit against OpenAI can proceed, says a federal judge

A federal judge has ruled that The New York Times and other newspapers can proceed with a copyright lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft seeking to end the practice of using their stories to train artificial intelligence chatbots. U.S. District Judge Sidney Stein of New York on Wednesday dismissed some of the claims made by media organizations but allowed the bulk of the case to continue, possibly to a jury trial. "We appreciate Judge Stein's careful consideration of these issues," New York Times attorney Ian Crosby said in a statement. "As the order indicates, all of our copyright claims will continue against Microsoft and Open AI for their widespread theft of millions of The Times's works, and we look forward to continuing to pursue them." The judge's ruling also pleased Frank Pine, executive editor of MediaNews Group and Tribune Publishing, owners of some of the newspapers that are part of a consolidated lawsuit in a Manhattan court. "The claims the court has dismissed do not undermine the main thrust of our case, which is that these companies have stolen our work and violated our copyright in a way that fundamentally damages our business," Pine said a statement. Stein didn't explain the reasons for his ruling, saying that would come "expeditiously." OpenAI said in a statement it welcomed "the court's dismissal of many of these claims and look forward to making it clear that we build our AI models using publicly available data, in a manner grounded in fair use, and supportive of innovation." Microsoft declined to comment. The Times has said OpenAI and its business partner Microsoft have threatened its livelihood by effectively stealing billions of dollars worth of work by its journalists, in some cases spitting out Times's material verbatim to people who seek answers from generative artificial intelligence like OpenAI's ChatGPT. -- -- -- -- -- The Associated Press and OpenAI have a licensing and technology agreement that allows OpenAI access to part of AP's text archives.

Judge Allows Newspaper Copyright Lawsuit Against OpenAI to Proceed

NEW YORK (AP) -- A federal judge has ruled that The New York Times and other newspapers can proceed with a copyright lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft seeking to end the practice of using their stories to train artificial intelligence chatbots. U.S. District Judge Sidney Stein of New York on Wednesday dismissed some of the claims made by media organizations but allowed the bulk of the case to continue, possibly to a jury trial. "The claims the court has dismissed do not undermine the main thrust of our case, which is that these companies have stolen our work and violated our copyright in a way that fundamentally damages our business," said a statement from Frank Pine, executive editor of MediaNews Group and Tribune Publishing, owners of some of the newspapers that are part of a consolidated lawsuit in a Manhattan court. Stein didn't explain the reasons for his ruling, saying that would come "expeditiously." OpenAI said in a statement it welcomed "the court's dismissal of many of these claims and look forward to making it clear that we build our AI models using publicly available data, in a manner grounded in fair use, and supportive of innovation." Microsoft declined to comment. The Times has said OpenAI and its business partner Microsoft have threatened its livelihood by effectively stealing billions of dollars worth of work by its journalists, in some cases spitting out Times' material verbatim to people who seek answers from generative artificial intelligence like OpenAI's ChatGPT. -- -- -- -- -- The Associated Press and OpenAI have a licensing and technology agreement that allows OpenAI access to part of AP's text archives. Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Judge allows newspaper copyright lawsuit against OpenAI to proceed

A US judge ruled that The New York Times and other newspapers can proceed with a copyright lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft over using their stories to train AI. While some claims were dismissed, the main case continues, with media groups alleging theft of their work, harming their business.A federal judge has ruled that The New York Times and other newspapers can proceed with a copyright lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft seeking to end the practice of using their stories to train artificial intelligence chatbots. US District Judge Sidney Stein of New York on Wednesday dismissed some of the claims made by media organizations but allowed the bulk of the case to continue, possibly to a jury trial. "We appreciate Judge Stein's careful consideration of these issues," New York Times attorney Ian Crosby said in a statement. "As the order indicates, all of our copyright claims will continue against Microsoft and Open AI for their widespread theft of millions of The Times's works, and we look forward to continuing to pursue them." The judge's ruling also pleased Frank Pine, executive editor of MediaNews Group and Tribune Publishing, owners of some of the newspapers that are part of a consolidated lawsuit in a Manhattan court. "The claims the court has dismissed do not undermine the main thrust of our case, which is that these companies have stolen our work and violated our copyright in a way that fundamentally damages our business," Pine said a statement. Stein didn't explain the reasons for his ruling, saying that would come "expeditiously." OpenAI said in a statement it welcomed "the court's dismissal of many of these claims and look forward to making it clear that we build our AI models using publicly available data, in a manner grounded in fair use, and supportive of innovation." Microsoft declined to comment. The Times has said OpenAI and its business partner Microsoft have threatened its livelihood by effectively stealing billions of dollars worth of work by its journalists, in some cases spitting out Times' material verbatim to people who seek answers from generative artificial intelligence like OpenAI's ChatGPT.

Court Advances The New York Times Lawsuit Against OpenAI

Anthropic Wins First Round In Lawsuit From Music Publishers Over Song Lyrics A federal judge has rebuffed OpenAI's bid to dismiss a copyright lawsuit brought by The New York Times accusing the tech company of mass theft for using the publication's content to train its AI system without consent or compensation. U.S. District Judge Sidney Stein on Wednesday advanced the Times' core claims related to copyright infringement while narrowing the scope of the case. She said she will issue a ruling "expeditiously." With the decision, the publication clears a key hurdle in the case as it seeks an answer on fair use -- a critical question in AI cases that asks whether the use of copyrighted material to train AI systems without a license is permitted. The publication filed the lawsuit in 2023 after an impasse in negotiations with OpenAI and Microsoft over a deal that'd resolve concerns around the use of its articles to train automated chatbots. The Times, after the highly publicized releases of ChatGPT and BingChat, notified the companies that their tech infringed on its articles. The terms of a resolution involved a licensing agreement and the institution of guardrails around generative artificial intelligence tools, though the talks reached no such truce. The lawsuit, which was followed by other news outlets suing OpenAI, could have far-reaching implications on the news publishing industry. Potentially at stake: The financial viability of media in a landscape in which readers can bypass direct sources in favor of search results generated by AI tools. Depending on the decisions in cases brought by publications, OpenAI could be cornered into accepting pricey licensing deals. In its complaint, the Times presented extensive evidence of products from OpenAI and Microsoft displaying near word-for-word excerpts of articles when prompted, allowing users to get around the paywall. These responses, the Times argued, go far beyond the snippets of texts typically shown with ordinary search results. One example: Bing Chat copied all but two of the first 396 words of its 2023 article "The Secrets Hamas knew about Israel's Military." An exhibit showed 100 other situations in which OpenAI's GPT was trained on and memorized articles from The Times, with word-for-word copying in red and differences in black. Following the lawsuit, OpenAI made changes so that its chatbot doesn't provide verbatim copies of articles. The Times' decision to sue tech companies stands in contrast to other publications that've opted to accept licensing deals, including News Corp, the owner of The Wall Street Journal and New York Post, and The New Yorker owner Condé Nast. Dotdash Meredith disclosed quarterly earnings report last year that payments from its OpenAI licensing deal amounted to $16 million annually. News Corp has framed its deal with the Sam Altman-led firm as advancing its interests in media. As the legal battle plays out, the Times disclosed earlier this year that it spent $10.8 million on costs associated with generative artificial intelligence litigation in 2024, according to its quarterly earnings filing. A finding of infringement could result in massive damages since the statutory maximum for each willful violation runs up to $150,000. The lawsuit advanced claims for copyright infringement, contributory copyright infringement, trademark dilution. Tuesday's ruling dismissed claims of unfair competition and a violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act "with prejudice," meaning they cannot be reasserted.