/
Navigation
Chronicles
Browse all articles
Explore
Semantic exploration
Research
Entity momentum
Nexus
Correlations & relationships
Story Arc
Topic evolution
Drift Map
Semantic trajectory animation
Posts
Analysis & commentary
Pulse API
Tech news intelligence API
Browse
Entities
Companies, people, products, technologies
Domains
Browse by publication source
Handles
Browse by social media handle
Detection
Concept Search
Semantic similarity search
High Impact Stories
Top coverage by position
Sentiment Analysis
Positive/negative coverage
Anomaly Detection
Unusual coverage patterns
Analysis
Rivalry Report
Compare two entities head-to-head
Semantic Pivots
Narrative discontinuities
Crisis Response
Event recovery patterns
Connected
Search: /
Command: ⌘K
Embeddings: large
TEXXR

Chronicles

The story behind the story

days · browse · Enter similar · o open

The NYT sues OpenAI and Microsoft for copyright infringement, alleging they used millions of its articles to train AI, the first major US media outlet to sue

Millions of articles from The New York Times were used to train chatbots that now compete with it, the lawsuit said.

New York Times

Context & Ripple Effects

The Times’ case put a major publisher at the center of the dispute over whether news archives can be used as model-training input when AI products may also serve readers’ information needs. Subsequent coverage showed the claim was not isolated: Alden-owned newspapers later brought a similar suit against the same companies.

The legal path was uncertain from the outset, with experts divided on the relevance of copyright and fair-use precedents. That uncertainty makes the case consequential not only for the parties, but for the commercial terms under which publishers and AI developers may deal with one another.

First-order effects

  • The Times seeks to hold OpenAI and Microsoft liable for allegedly training AI systems on its articles, placing their training-data practices and product outputs under legal scrutiny.
  • OpenAI and Microsoft must defend their use of news content in court; the dispute directly tests the Times’ ability to protect or monetize that material against AI competitors.

Second-order effects

  • Other publishers gain a concrete litigation template, as reflected in the later lawsuit by eight Alden newspapers, increasing the potential for coordinated pressure on AI developers.
  • AI developers and news publishers face stronger incentives to negotiate permissions or define acceptable use, since a court outcome could affect the cost and availability of high-quality news data.

Third-order effects

  • If courts constrain unlicensed training or outputs that substitute for source publishers, proprietary archives could become a more explicitly licensed AI input rather than an assumed web resource.
  • If broad fair-use arguments prevail instead, publishers may have less leverage over training use and may focus on product differentiation or commercial partnerships; the doctrine remains unsettled.

The trend: This is part of the broader shift from open-web scraping toward contested, commercial control of content used to build generative AI.

Discussion

  • @bdsams Brad Sams on x
    This is going to be significant, either OpenAI/Microsoft finds a way to not pay or they are forced to license the content at which point...everyone whose text they used could be entitled to payments which would be unsustainable.
  • @loudmouthjulia Julia Alexander on x
    This felt wholly inevitable, and like the first domino to fall. Let's see if any form of precedent will be set.
  • @adamsinger Adam Singer on x
    @rustybrick “Well we could have had AGI utopia, but the lawyers got involved”
  • @rustybrick Barry Schwartz on x
    More AI lawsuits
  • @ivanthek @ivanthek on x
    Tip of the AIceberg. The Times Sues OpenAI and Microsoft Over A.I.'s Use of Copyrighted Work https://www.nytimes.com/...
  • @brianstelter Brian Stelter on x
    “The Times is the first major American media organization to sue the companies, the creators of ChatGPT and other popular A.I. platforms, over copyright issues associated with its written works...”