2:08 am - April 17, 2025
Media companies and authors challenge AI training practices in landmark legal clash.
Twelve copyright lawsuits filed against OpenAI and Microsoft have been consolidated into a single case in the Southern District of New York, in what is set to become a defining legal battle over intellectual property rights and the use of journalistic and literary content to train artificial intelligence models.
The cases, brought by major media players including the New York Times, the New York Daily News and seven other titles owned by Alden Global Capital’s MediaNews Group and Tribune Publishing, have been merged alongside class actions filed by high-profile authors such as Sarah Silverman, Ta-Nehisi Coates, Michael Chabon and Junot Díaz.
The decision to consolidate, announced last week by Karen K. Caldwell, chair of the Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, followed a disagreement among plaintiffs over jurisdiction. OpenAI had supported a move to the Northern District of California, but the panel ruled that centralising the litigation in New York would “serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient conduct of this litigation.”
Some plaintiffs had argued that the advanced stage of pretrial proceedings in certain cases made centralisation unnecessary. Caldwell rejected that view, noting that only four depositions had been completed and at least 40 more were expected. She said the technical complexity of the lawsuits—particularly around how OpenAI’s large language models were trained—justified a unified approach.
“Each action will involve overlapping, complex, and voluminous discovery regarding how defendants trained and designed their LLMs,” Caldwell said, adding that consolidation would avoid duplicated effort and reduce the risk of inconsistent rulings.
The litigation brings together some of the most influential names in media and publishing in a challenge to how AI firms build their models. It will test how far copyright law can protect original content in an era where algorithms are trained on vast, often unlicensed, datasets. The outcome could set major precedents for the future relationship between tech platforms and the creators whose work powers them.
Source: Noah Wire Services
- https://www.publishersmarketplace.com/2025/04/copyright-cases-against-openai-and-microsoft-consolidated-in-ny-court/ – This article discusses the consolidation of copyright lawsuits against OpenAI and Microsoft in New York, highlighting the high-profile plaintiffs and the complexity of the technological issues involved.
- https://nquiringminds.com/ai-legal-news/OpenAI-and-Microsoft-Face-Consolidated-Copyright-Lawsuits-in-New-York/ – This piece provides details on the consolidation of lawsuits under Judge Sidney H. Stein in New York, including the involvement of notable media outlets and authors.
- https://news.bloomberglaw.com/ip-law/openai-copyright-lawsuits-discovery-consolidated-in-new-york – This report explains how the consolidation will streamline pretrial proceedings and discovery processes, emphasizing the efficiency of centralizing these complex cases.
- https://chatgptiseatingtheworld.com/2025/04/05/updated-map-of-40-us-copyright-suits-v-ai-companies-with-transfer-of-all-suits-v-openai-to-judge-stein/ – This article provides an overview of the transfer of lawsuits against OpenAI to Judge Stein, focusing on the broader legal landscape and its impact on AI and intellectual property.
- https://www.noahwire.com – This source is referenced for the original article but lacks specific verification of the claim, as it does not provide additional external validation beyond the provided narrative.
Noah Fact Check Pro
The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first
emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed
below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may
warrant further investigation.
Freshness check
Score:
9
Notes:
The narrative appears recent, referencing ongoing legal proceedings announced last week.
Quotes check
Score:
8
Notes:
Quotes from Karen K. Caldwell are provided without an early online reference. However, they are directly attributed, enhancing credibility.
Source reliability
Score:
8
Notes:
The narrative originates from a credible aggregation platform referencing official legal documents, though it doesn’t directly cite a specific well-known publication.
Plausability check
Score:
9
Notes:
The claims are plausible and align with current legal and technological trends. The narrative does not present improbable scenarios.
Overall assessment
Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): PASS
Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): HIGH
Summary:
The narrative is fresh, reliable, and plausible. Quotes are attributed, though no early online reference is found. The source is generally reliable due to its connection to official legal proceedings.
Register for Editor’s picks
Stay ahead of the curve with our Editor's picks newsletter – your weekly insight into the trends, challenges, and innovations driving the future of digital media.
