Reported by Reuters, a New York federal judge dismissed a copyright lawsuit brought by news outlets Raw Story and AlterNet against OpenAI. The case alleged that OpenAI misused thousands of articles to train its popular AI models, including ChatGPT, without authorization. However, the judge allowed the plaintiffs to file an amended complaint, although she expressed doubt about their ability to establish a valid injury.
U.S. District Judge Colleen McMahon ruled that the news outlets had not demonstrated sufficient harm to proceed with the case. “The alleged injury for which Plaintiffs truly seek redress is not the exclusion of [copyright management information],” McMahon said. “But rather the use of Plaintiffs’ articles to develop ChatGPT without compensation.”
The plaintiffs, represented by Matt Topic of Loevy + Loevy, maintain confidence in their ability to address the court’s concerns. “We are certain we can address the concerns the court identified through an amended complaint,” Topic said.
Allegations Against OpenAI
The lawsuit, filed in February, accused OpenAI of training its models using articles from Raw Story and AlterNet without permission. The plaintiffs claimed that ChatGPT could reproduce their copyrighted material when prompted, raising concerns about intellectual property infringement.
The outlets also alleged that OpenAI unlawfully removed copyright management information (CMI) from their articles. However, they stopped short of claiming direct copyright infringement. Judge McMahon dismissed the claims, siding with OpenAI’s argument that they lacked sufficient legal grounds.
A Broader Legal Trend
This case is one of many legal challenges faced by OpenAI and other AI developers over the use of copyrighted material to train generative AI systems. In December, The New York Times became the first media outlet to sue OpenAI over similar concerns.
Judge McMahon’s decision highlighted the difficulty in proving harm under current copyright laws. She noted, “The harm cited by the outlets is not the type of harm that has been elevated to justify the lawsuit.” She added that other legal theories might address such harm but were not presented in this case.
What’s Next for the Lawsuit?
Despite the dismissal, the court left room for the plaintiffs to revise their complaint. “Whether there is another statute or legal theory that does elevate this type of harm remains to be seen,” McMahon said.
Raw Story and AlterNet’s legal team expressed their intent to pursue the case further, while OpenAI declined to comment on the ruling.
Legal Context and Implications
This lawsuit underscores the ongoing tension between creators and AI developers over the use of intellectual property in training generative AI models. Courts continue to navigate uncharted territory as they attempt to reconcile copyright laws with rapidly advancing AI technologies.
As the use of generative AI systems expands, the case serves as a reminder of the legal and ethical questions surrounding intellectual property rights in the digital age.
This case marks another milestone in the battle over intellectual property in the age of AI, as courts grapple with how to address the balance between innovation and copyright protections.
