Ruling keeps key copyright claims alive in case over AI training data.
A federal judge has denied OpenAI’s attempt to dismiss key parts of a copyright infringement lawsuit brought by The New York Times, allowing the case to proceed and intensifying scrutiny of how AI companies acquire and use copyrighted content.
The ruling, by Judge Sidney H Stein in the Southern District of New York, keeps alive several claims central to the case. These include direct and contributory copyright infringement and trademark dilution, some of which relate to conduct more than three years before the complaint was filed.
“The Court hereby denies (1) OpenAI’s motions to dismiss the direct infringement claims involving conduct occurring more than three years before the complaints were filed; (2) the defendants’ motions to dismiss the contributory copyright infringement claims; and (3) the defendants’ motions to dismiss the state and federal trademark dilution claims in the Daily News action,” said Judge Stein in official court documents.
The decision follows oral arguments in January and narrows the scope of the lawsuit by dismissing some claims, but still marks a significant moment in a wider debate over the legal limits of using copyrighted material to train generative AI models.
The NYT brought the case last year, along with the Daily News LP and the Center for Investigative Reporting, targeting OpenAI, Microsoft and Google over the use of journalistic content in the development of their AI systems.
Tech companies argue that existing copyright law is ill-suited to AI and that too-strict enforcement could hamper US innovation and give China a competitive edge. Others, including a group of Hollywood creatives who recently wrote to the White House, have warned that weakening copyright rules would harm the media and entertainment sectors.
Although many AI firms now acknowledge the need to compensate content owners, there is little agreement over how such arrangements should work. The Times has insisted that existing copyright law already provides a clear framework.
At an industry event last year, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and New York Times journalist Andrew Ross Sorkin debated the case publicly. Altman said there was a need for “new economic models” to help creators monetise their work but added, “The New York Times is on the wrong side of this suit.”
Sorkin replied, “We will discuss and debate this, in court.”
Judge Stein is expected to issue a more detailed opinion soon.
Source: Noah Wire Services
- https://siliconangle.com/2025/03/26/new-york-judge-allows-new-york-times-copyright-lawsuit-openai-proceed/ – This article corroborates the denial of OpenAI’s motion to dismiss the copyright infringement lawsuit by Judge Sidney H. Stein, which allows the core of the case to proceed against OpenAI and Microsoft. It also highlights the ongoing debate about copyright laws and AI technology.
- https://hls.harvard.edu/today/does-chatgpt-violate-new-york-times-copyrights/ – This piece explains the context of the lawsuit, including The New York Times’ allegations that ChatGPT uses its content without permission, and the counterargument by OpenAI that its actions fall under fair use. It also delves into the broader implications for AI and copyright law.
- https://harvardlawreview.org/blog/2024/04/nyt-v-openai-the-timess-about-face/ – The article discusses the lawsuit’s significance in the context of AI and copyright law, highlighting The New York Times’ shift from previously advocating for flexible use of content to now seeking strict enforcement of its rights against OpenAI.
- https://www.justice.gov/archives/sco/file/1373816/dl?inline= – Although not directly related, this report touches on broader legal considerations involving technology and digital content, highlighting legal frameworks in different contexts, though it does not specifically address AI copyright disputes.
- https://siliconangle.com/2025/03/26/new-york-judge-allows-new-york-times-copyright-lawsuit-openai-proceed/ – This article provides insight into the ongoing legal battle and the implications for AI companies like OpenAI in terms of copyright laws, which is central to understanding the lawsuit’s progression.
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:
10
Notes:
The information is current, involving recent legal proceedings and ongoing debates about AI and copyright laws, with no indications that it is out of date.
Quotes check
Score:
8
Notes:
Quotes from Judge Stein and individuals like Sam Altman and Andrew Ross Sorkin are present, but their earliest online references could not be specifically identified beyond this article.
Source reliability
Score:
9
Notes:
The narrative originates from Deadline, which is generally considered a reliable entertainment news site. However, additional verification from primary sources like official court documents or statements from The New York Times or OpenAI would enhance reliability.
Plausability check
Score:
9
Notes:
The claims are plausible and involve contemporary legal and technological issues. The context aligns with ongoing discussions around AI, copyright, and content creation.
Overall assessment
Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): PASS
Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): HIGH
Summary:
The narrative is fresh, the quotes appear authentic, and the source is generally reliable. The plausibility of the story is high given the current context of AI developments and legal challenges.
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.
