Leading Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee have criticized the Justice Department for exceeding its authority and presenting a flawed legal argument in support of OpenAI in an ongoing copyright lawsuit filed by The New York Times and other publishers.
In a filing submitted to federal court in Manhattan on Friday, Representatives Jamie Raskin of Maryland, Jerrold Nadler of New York, and Hank Johnson of Georgia expressed concern that the Justice Department’s recent position could undermine copyright protections broadly. The lawsuit, initiated in late 2023, involves The New York Times and other news organizations suing OpenAI and Microsoft, accusing the tech companies of using their copyrighted articles without permission or compensation to train artificial intelligence models such as ChatGPT.
The Justice Department had argued in an early September court filing that repurposing content from news articles for AI training constitutes a transformative use protected under copyright law. Additionally, the department asserted that the development of AI technology is vital to national security and that this urgency should outweigh potential harms to copyright holders.
The Democratic lawmakers rejected this line of reasoning, pointing out that the Copyright Act of 1976 does not include any national security exceptions, nor does it empower the Justice Department to unilaterally exempt AI training from copyright protections. They described the government’s argument as a “bulldozer” that would “eliminate copyright protection with respect to A.I. training for all works in all circumstances.”
The lawmakers emphasized the creative elements inherent in journalistic works, noting that Times articles reflect not only facts but also the authors’ structuring, framing, and analysis—elements traditionally safeguarded by copyright law. They warned that adopting the Justice Department’s approach could have severe financial consequences for the broader copyright community and the nation.
The suit is currently pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York before Judge Sidney H. Stein, who is considering motions for summary judgment to potentially resolve the case without a trial. Last Friday marked the deadline for amicus briefs from outside parties supporting various positions; the Judiciary Committee Democrats’ filing was the only one submitted by sitting lawmakers to date.
While Representative Nadler plans to retire, Raskin and Johnson remain key figures in the Judiciary Committee and its Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, Artificial Intelligence, and the Internet. Should Democrats regain control of the House following Tuesday’s midterm elections, they are expected to adopt a more interventionist stance on AI companies, moving away from the relatively hands-off approach that characterized much of the current administration’s regulatory posture.
House Republicans have not advanced significant legislation addressing AI, focusing instead on initiatives such as consumer protections related to utility rate increases affecting data centers. Meanwhile, Democrats have voiced strong criticism over donations from OpenAI, Microsoft, Google, and Meta to former President Donald Trump’s inauguration and White House renovation projects, suggesting these contributions have influenced his antiregulatory policies. Although any new regulation would face likely vetoes from Trump or future Republican-controlled administrations, Democrats could use investigations to increase oversight of technology companies and their government relationships.
The Justice Department declined further comment beyond its September court filing. OpenAI and Microsoft did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The outcome of this case could set a significant precedent for the intersection of copyright law and artificial intelligence development.