OpenAI wants to know whether New York Times articles are ‘original’ to determine which parts are protected by copyright. OpenAI is requesting journalists’ source materials from The New York Times to defend against a multi-million dollar copyright infringement lawsuit. The Times argues that OpenAI’s demands are overly broad and could discourage journalistic activities.
Since last year, several rightsholders, including record labels, book authors, visual artists, and newspapers, have sued companies developing AI models. They allege that their works were used to train these models without proper compensation. The New York Times is among the plaintiffs, targeting OpenAI and Microsoft in its ongoing lawsuit. OpenAI recently suggested consolidating this case with similar lawsuits filed by other newspapers, but The Times opposed this proposal.
As part of the discovery phase, both parties are requesting evidence to support or refute the copyright infringement claims. OpenAI is particularly interested in determining the originality of The New York Times’ works. The company has requested documents that identify the expressive, original, and human-authored content of the asserted works, as well as any non-expressive, non-original, or non-human-authored content.
OpenAI’s Motion to Compel
In the ongoing lawsuit, OpenAI wants to know whether New York Times articles are ‘original’ to defend against copyright infringement claims. The New York Times refused to share reporters’ notes and other requested information, citing the reporter’s privilege and the burdensome nature of the request. In response, OpenAI has filed a motion to compel the court to intervene. OpenAI argues that understanding what parts of the articles are original and worthy of copyright protection is essential for its defense. The company claims that any part of the copyrighted work that is not original to The Times, such as copied content or public domain elements, should not be protected.
The Times contends that its articles are copyrightable, even if they contain third-party material. The newspaper emphasizes that the expressive nature of a work is determined by the work itself, not by the underlying notes. The Times argues that even if an article comprises significant verbatim quotes from sources, it remains protected by copyright.
The newspaper also reiterates that the discovery requests are overly broad and infringe on the reporter’s privilege. Disclosing all source material for every copyrighted article could have a chilling effect on journalistic activities and the willingness to pursue copyright lawsuits.
Overreach and Implications for Journalism
OpenAI wants to know whether New York Times articles are ‘original’ to challenge the scope of the newspaper’s copyright claims. OpenAI’s request for The New York Times’ source materials as part of its defense in a copyright infringement lawsuit raises significant concerns about overreach and the potential impact on journalism. By seeking detailed information on what parts of The Times’ articles are original and what parts are derived from other sources, OpenAI aims to argue that only the original content deserves copyright protection. However, this approach could set a troubling precedent for the industry.
Journalistic work often involves compiling information from various sources, including interviews, public records, and other media reports. While the end product is a unique composition, the individual elements might not always be original. OpenAI’s demand for source materials, including reporters’ notes, could undermine the value of this creative process. If journalists are forced to disclose all their sources and the extent of original content, it could discourage thorough reporting and investigative journalism.
From a legal standpoint, OpenAI’s strategy hinges on the interpretation of copyright law. Additionally, the request infringes on the reporter’s privilege, a principle that protects journalists from revealing confidential sources and information gathered during their reporting. This protection is vital for ensuring that sources feel safe to share information without fear of exposure. If this privilege is compromised, it could have a chilling effect and ultimately harm the public’s right to be informed.
Also Read: Audi to Introduce ChatGPT on Current & Future Models, Revolutionizing In-Car Technology.
