A closely watched copyright infringement lawsuit involving major news organizations and technology companies Microsoft and OpenAI advanced last week with competing summary judgment motions filed in a Manhattan federal court. The case centers on allegations that the tech firms improperly used copyrighted news articles to train large language models (LLMs) without authorization, raising questions about fair use and the impact of artificial intelligence on the news industry.
The lawsuit was initially brought in 2023 by The New York Times and joined by other prominent news outlets, including the Chicago Tribune. The plaintiffs argue that Microsoft and OpenAI copied millions of articles behind paywalls to develop AI tools such as Microsoft’s Copilot and OpenAI’s ChatGPT. They contend that these practices amount to copyright infringement, as the AI products produce content that serves as a substitute for original journalism, thereby harming the market for news and undermining incentives for professional reporting.
In their Friday filing, the news organizations asked U.S. District Judge Sidney H. Stein to reject the defendants’ reliance on the fair use doctrine, seeking a legal determination that the use of news content at any stage—from data acquisition to model training and user responses—was unauthorized. Their lawyers emphasized the broader implications, arguing that responsible AI must respect the creative efforts of journalists to ensure a healthy society and sustainable news industry. The filing also raised concerns about the proliferation of low-quality “pink slime” news sites fueled by AI-generated content, which they say distorts facts and undercuts legitimate journalism.
The tech companies deny the allegations and have moved for summary judgment to dismiss the claims. Microsoft asserted that training AI models with preexisting journalism constitutes a transformative use protected by copyright law, helping “locate, synthesize, and contextualize” information rather than replace protected expression. The company said it respects journalism’s public role and has partnered with news organizations in the past but argued that copyright does not grant the plaintiffs the right to block new technologies. Microsoft’s lawyers also rejected the notion that Copilot is used primarily for news consumption.
OpenAI similarly defended its technology, asserting in court papers that facts and language are not owned by any one entity and that transforming factual reporting into AI responses constitutes progress. OpenAI has acknowledged that many users seek news through its chatbot but challenged claims that its services harm publishers’ traffic and subscriptions. Citing expert analysis, OpenAI argued that The Times and others have not demonstrated a negative impact on web traffic caused by AI-generated summaries.
The court filings reflect a broader debate about the balance between copyright protections and technological innovation. Both sides cited a variety of cultural and legal references, including the concept of transformative use and notable copyright cases, to underscore their positions. Judge Stein is expected to rule in the coming weeks on whether key legal issues can be resolved without a trial.
Legal experts and industry observers are closely monitoring the outcome, as it could set important precedents for how copyright law applies to AI-generated content and the future of journalism in an increasingly digital landscape.