News outlets ask judge to sanction OpenAI over evidence in copyright case
5 verified5 unconfirmed2 contested
The New York Times, the Daily News, and other media outlets are asking a federal judge to impose sanctions on OpenAI, accusing the company of hiding and destroying evidence in a high-profile copyright infringement lawsuit. The outlets allege that OpenAI made misrepresentations for two years about its ability to search its own training datasets and ChatGPT conversation logs for copyrighted news content. A court-ordered deposition of an OpenAI employee in April allegedly revealed that the company had already conducted internal searches of its training corpus for copyrighted journalism, contradicting its earlier claims that such searches were technically burdensome or impossible. The newspapers argue that OpenAI’s conduct amounts to “discovery misconduct” that has distorted evidence in the case. The plaintiffs are seeking sanctions that include preventing OpenAI from using certain chat log samples as evidence and requiring the company to pay legal fees. OpenAI has denied the allegations and accused the Times of trying to invade user privacy as its case weakens. The lawsuit, filed in late 2023, tests whether training AI systems on copyrighted news articles without permission is protected under fair use.
What’s verified
The New York Times and the Daily News are asking a federal judge to sanction OpenAI for allegedly hiding evidence related to its use of copyrighted news articles in training its AI models.
The plaintiffs allege that OpenAI misrepresented its ability to search its training datasets and ChatGPT conversation logs, claims contradicted by an April deposition of an OpenAI employee.
The lawsuit, filed in late 2023, centers on whether OpenAI’s use of copyrighted journalism to train ChatGPT violates copyright law or is protected by fair use.
The outlets are seeking sanctions including barring OpenAI from using certain chat log evidence and awarding attorney fees.
An OpenAI spokesperson denied the allegations, calling them “blatantly false” and accusing the Times of seeking to invade user privacy. Another source reported that OpenAI did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Where accounts differ
One source quotes an OpenAI spokesperson denying the allegations and accusing the Times of trying to invade user privacy. Another source states that OpenAI did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Thursday.
No other conflicting reports identified across sources.
Not yet confirmed
A single source reports that OpenAI data privacy engineer Vinnie Monaco was the employee deposed in April, and that the deposition revealed internal searches for copyrighted works as well as a database of about 78 million de-identified ChatGPT conversations and a “Bloom” filter under “Project Giraffe.”
A single source reports that the plaintiffs originally requested 120 million chat logs, later reduced to 20 million, and that the submitted sample was deemed “unusable” by the court due to redactions. It also alleges that OpenAI deleted billions of outputs after a court preservation order.
A single source reports that The New York Times has spent more than $28 million on litigation against AI companies, including a separate suit against Perplexity.
A single source mentions that OpenAI rival Anthropic agreed to pay $1.5 billion to settle a copyright case with book authors.
It remains unclear exactly what evidence the judge will consider and when a ruling on the sanctions motion may come.
Key figures
The New York Times
The Daily News (New York)
OpenAI
Microsoft
Ian B. Crosby (lead counsel for plaintiffs)
Steven Lieberman (attorney for Daily News)
Drew Pusateri (OpenAI spokesperson)
Sources: TechCrunch, abcnews.com
