OpenAI accused of hiding key evidence in New York Times copyright fight

The New York Times and The Daily News say OpenAI has been dishonest about its ability to track how much of their journalism appears in ChatGPT. Court documents reveal OpenAI had tools to search its training data and even built a system to detect when ChatGPT copied content word for word. This contradicts OpenAI’s earlier claims that such searches were impossible or too difficult.

An OpenAI engineer admitted in a deposition that the company had a database of 78 million de-identified ChatGPT conversations and a tool called Project Giraffe that flagged regurgitated text. The news outlets argue OpenAI then provided heavily redacted chat logs to the court, making them useless for proving copyright violations. They also accuse OpenAI of deleting billions of chat records after the lawsuit began, which would violate court orders to preserve evidence.

The New York Times and The Daily News are now asking the judge to sanction OpenAI. They want the company barred from using its provided chat logs as evidence, and they want the court to assume those logs would have shown significant copying. OpenAI denies the allegations, calling them false and accusing the Times of trying to access private user data as its case weakens.

The New York Times sued OpenAI in 2023, arguing that training AI on its articles without permission violates copyright law. OpenAI has maintained that its use of copyrighted material falls under fair use and that producing chat logs would raise privacy concerns. This latest twist raises questions about transparency and whether OpenAI has been fully cooperative with the court.

This case matters because it could set a precedent for how AI companies use copyrighted material to train their models. If OpenAI is found to have hidden evidence, it could weaken its legal position and influence future lawsuits. For everyday users, the outcome may determine whether AI outputs can freely include copyrighted works or if creators will have more control over their content.

Next, the court will decide whether to impose sanctions on OpenAI. If the judge rules in favor of the news outlets, it could force OpenAI to hand over more data or face penalties. The decision may also shape how other AI companies handle similar legal challenges.

Did OpenAI’s actions cross a legal line or is this a case of aggressive lawyering by the news outlets

How should AI companies balance transparency with user privacy in legal disputes

---

Filed under: AI, Copyright, OpenAI, ChatGPT, NewYorkTimes