Major news organizations including The New York Times and the Daily News are escalating legal pressure on OpenAI, asking a federal judge to impose sanctions for allegedly concealing evidence about how the company trained its AI systems on millions of copyrighted news articles. The move marks a critical moment in a broader copyright battle that could determine whether AI companies can freely use journalistic content to build their products.

What Evidence Are News Outlets Claiming OpenAI Is Hiding?

In a filing Thursday in Manhattan federal court, the newspapers alleged that OpenAI "chose obstruction" over releasing crucial datasets and ChatGPT logs that would show how the AI system used copyrighted news content during training. The plaintiffs argue that a recent deposition of an OpenAI employee contradicts the company's earlier claims about its ability to search for copyrighted material in its training datasets.

"This motion asks the court to punish OpenAI for hiding and destroying evidence showing how ChatGPT was trained on stolen journalism," said Steven Lieberman, attorney for the New York Daily News and seven of its sister papers.

Steven Lieberman, Attorney for the New York Daily News

OpenAI has described its limitations in sharing ChatGPT logs as a privacy protection measure. The company's response suggests the newspapers' case is weakening. "As the Times' case weakens and they've been forced to drop claims against us, they're persisting with their efforts to invade the privacy of people who have nothing to do with this case, including by making these blatantly false allegations," an OpenAI spokesperson stated.

How Is This Copyright Battle Affecting the News Industry?

The lawsuit reflects a fundamental threat to traditional journalism's business model. When AI chatbots can summarize news without sending readers to the original articles, publishers lose the web traffic and advertising revenue that sustains their operations. The problem intensified when Google introduced AI-generated summaries at the top of search results in 2024, cutting off clicks to news sources.

The New York Times has already spent more than $28 million fighting AI companies in court, according to regulatory filings. This includes a separate lawsuit against AI company Perplexity filed last year. Among the sanctions the newspapers are seeking are attorney fees to cover the costs of securing what they describe as "improperly withheld" evidence.

What Are the Key Legal Arguments in This Case?

• Fair Use Defense: OpenAI and other tech companies argue that training AI systems on digitized books, online articles, and other writings found on the internet is protected by the "fair use" doctrine of U.S. copyright law, a theory being tested in dozens of lawsuits across creative industries.
• Unfair Competition Claim: The New York Times focuses on a different argument than book authors have made, claiming OpenAI "seeks to free-ride on The Times's massive investment in its journalism by using it to build substitutive products without permission or payment."
• Discovery Misconduct: The newspapers allege OpenAI has been "making misrepresentations" for two years about its ability to search for copyrighted content in its AI training datasets and logs, constituting discovery misconduct that could distort evidence.

How Are Other News Organizations Responding?

The lawsuit has grown beyond The New York Times. Other major news organizations have joined the fight, including MediaNews Group-owned newspapers like the Daily News and the Chicago Tribune, digital media publisher Ziff Davis, and the nonprofit Center for Investigative Reporting.

Interestingly, some news outlets have taken a different approach by signing licensing deals with OpenAI and other AI companies such as Google and Meta. These agreements typically pay the outlet a fee in exchange for allowing the AI company to train on their news feeds or archives. The Associated Press was the first to announce such a deal with OpenAI in 2023, establishing a model that other publishers are now following.

What Precedent Exists for AI Copyright Settlements?

The largest copyright settlement involving AI training so far came from OpenAI's rival Anthropic, which agreed to pay book authors $1.5 billion for training its chatbot Claude on pirated works. However, this amount represents only a small fraction of Anthropic's $965 billion market valuation as the company prepares to go public.

The outcome of the New York Times case could set a precedent for how much AI companies must pay for copyrighted content, or whether they can use it at all without permission. This legal battle arrives at a critical moment for the news industry, which is already struggling with declining print revenues and competition from digital platforms. The stakes extend beyond journalism to other creative industries, including visual artists, novelists, and music record labels, all of whom have filed lawsuits against AI companies with mixed results so far.

Steps News Organizations Are Taking to Protect Their Content

• Legal Action: Filing lawsuits and seeking sanctions against AI companies for discovery misconduct and unfair competition based on using copyrighted content without permission or compensation.
• Licensing Agreements: Negotiating direct deals with AI companies to receive payment in exchange for allowing the use of news archives and feeds for AI training purposes.
• Court Motions: Requesting judges impose penalties including attorney fees and other sanctions to punish companies for allegedly hiding or destroying evidence related to AI training practices.