Trump Administration Sides With OpenAI in Publishers’ Copyright Lawsuits
The federal government says making AI companies pay for content used to train their models would undermine national security.
In a series of copyright disputes between news organizations and OpenAI, the Trump administration has taken the ChatGPT-maker's side, arguing that its use of publishers' content to train AI models is a matter of fair use. This stance was evident in a statement of interest filed in various cases in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, including suits initiated by The New York Times and Ziff Davis, the parent company of CNET.
The federal government contends that a ruling in favor of the publishers could stifle AI development, reduce competition among AI firms, and diminish the country's competitiveness against foreign developers. The administration asserts that legal rules creating significant hurdles for robust AI industry growth pose threats to national security and provide a competitive edge to adversaries without such restrictions.
Graham James, a spokesperson for The New York Times, criticized the administration for backing a few trillion-dollar AI companies at the expense of American creators, stating that it undermines both creators and AI developers alike. He emphasized that AI companies should compensate fairly for the content that enables their products, as required by copyright law.
CNET has requested comment from representatives of OpenAI and Ziff Davis. Initially, The New York Times alleged that large language models, like those powering ChatGPT, were trained on millions of its articles, effectively "free-riding" on the Times' journalistic investments and creating competing products. The government, however, views the AI models' capacity to help other entities compete with large media corporations positively.
They pointed to examples such as independent authors using AI to generate images that would otherwise require a photographer or license, and AI directing users to alternative sources offering contrasting information or perspectives. The administration argues that it is not in the public's interest for dominant technology companies to monopolize LLM training due to licensing entry barriers, which primarily serve as substantial subsidies for traditional mainstream media companies.
While major media companies are not the sole plaintiffs against OpenAI, authors, including high-profile figures like George R.R. Martin, have also accused the company of copyright infringement in connection with model training. Anthropic, an AI rival to OpenAI, recently settled piracy claims with authors for $1.5 billion, though a judge ruled that Anthropic's use of copyrighted material was deemed fair use.
Recently, publishers accused OpenAI of withholding evidence about its model training methods, a claim the company has denied.
Written by urgent.news from CNET's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
