NYT AI case vs OpenAI, Microsoft could be ‘watershed moment’ – community reacts

Another copyright infringement lawsuit has hit the artificial intelligence (AI) industry – this time against former media outlet New York Times (NYT) against OpenAI, creator of ChatGPT.

On December 27, the NYT filed suit, alleging that OpenAI illegally used its content to train AI chatbots, thereby impeding the NYT from doing its job.

The lawsuit invokes both the United States Constitution and copyright law to protect the NYT's original journalism. It also points out that Microsoft's Bing AI is excerpted verbatim from its content.

“By providing Times content without The Times' consent or permission, Defendants' devices undermine and undermine The Times' relationship with its readers and deprive The Times of subscription, licensing, advertising and affiliate revenue.”

The New York Times is not the first media company to raise concerns about AI chatbots. In November, the News Media Alliance made similar claims that AI chatbots were illegally ripping off copyrighted news and that the developers were taking revenue, data and users away from news publications.

Cecilia Zinetti, an intellectual property (IP) and AI lawyer, posted on social media that this is “the best case yet” that generative AI is committing copyright infringement.

RELATED: The ultimate 2023 AI guide: Here's what happened and why

She highlighted her key argument against OpenAI and Microsoft in the NYT case because the “www.nytimes.com” website is the most represented source of copyright, second only to Wikipedia and the US Patent Documents Database.

Another example in the lawsuit highlights a small difference, just a few words, between the original NYT content and the GPT-4 output.

According to the lawsuit, the NYT reached out to Microsoft and OpenAI in April 2023 to raise intellectual property concerns and “explore the possibility of an amicable settlement,” but to no avail.

In a series of tweets, Zenithi revealed that she was a paid subscriber to the NYT and NYT Food archives, and that if ChatGPT gave her the articles and full recipes for free, she said, “I … wouldn't pay the NYT.”

She said the case has the potential to be a “watershed” for both AI and copyright.

Meanwhile, a thread about the lawsuit has sprung up on the OpenAI developer forum, where responses have been mixed.

Some users hope the NYT is “unsuccessful” on the claim, while others say it's an interesting situation to follow and “it's worth a shot for the Times.”

In September, the Authors Guild — a US-based writers' union — also filed a class-action lawsuit against OpenAI, alleging misuse of copyrighted material to train AI models.

OpenAI is not alone in being the target of such lawsuits. Universal Music Group sued Anthropic AI in October for copyright infringement over “vast quantities of copyrighted works – including thousands of musical compositions” owned or controlled by publishers.

Midjourney, Deviant Art and Stality AI are also suing emerging artists against its use of art to train its image-generating AI models. An American judge initially dismissed the case for lack of evidence. The case then expanded and evolved with more in-depth allegations.

OpenAI has said that it plans to cover any legal costs ChatGPT users incur in a legal battle against copyright infringement on a business level.

Magazine: ‘AI killed the industry': EasyTranslate boss adapting to change