In the online realm, copyright infringement is a common occurrence, with virtually anything accessible on the web. The breach of copyright is significant news for the affected company, especially when it involves globally recognised entities. On Wednesday, December 27th, The New York Times initiated a lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft, alleging copyright infringement. This move escalates the ongoing legal dispute over the unauthorised utilisation of published content for training Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems.
About the Copyright Infringement
Filed in the Federal District Court in Manhattan, the legal action asserts that The New York Times’ millions of articles were utilised to train chatbots, now functioning as competitive sources of reliable information against the news outlet.
While the lawsuit doesn’t specify a precise monetary claim, it seeks accountability for “Billions of dollars in statutory and actual damages” arising from the “Unlawful copying and use” of The New York Times’ valuable works. Additionally, it calls for the destruction of any chatbot models and training data incorporating copyrighted material from The New York Times.
The lawsuit by The Times provides several examples where GPT-4 generated altered versions of the newspaper’s content. One instance highlighted the AI-producing text closely resembling a Times article about predatory lending practices in the taxi industry.
However, GPT-4 omitted crucial context about the city’s revenue from taxi medallion sales and taxes on private sales. The suit argues that Microsoft and OpenAI’s GPT models directly compete with Times content, limiting commercial opportunities by altering it, removing referral links, and appropriating revenue opportunities. The Times contended that using their content to train Large Language Models (LLMs) without consent constitutes free-riding on their significant efforts and investment.
The Detonating Agent Before the Legal Action
Looking in more detail at the complaint, The New York Times stated that in April, they engaged with Microsoft and OpenAI, expressing concerns about the unauthorised use of their intellectual property. The intent was to seek an amicable resolution, potentially involving a commercial agreement and the implementation of “Technological guardrails” regarding generative AI products. However, the discussions did not lead to a resolution, prompting legal action.
What Did the Complaint Say About This Copyright Infringement?
In an email statement, The New York Times acknowledged the potential of Generative AI for the public and journalism. However, it emphasised that journalistic material should only be utilised for commercial purposes with permission from the original source. The New York Times stressed that these tools are developed using independent journalism and content, which is accessible due to the reporting, editing, and fact-checking carried out by them and their peers at significant cost and expertise.
They emphasised that established copyright laws safeguard their journalism and content, asserting that if Microsoft and OpenAI intend to use their work for commercial purposes, legal requirements dictate obtaining permission first — a step the companies allegedly failed to take.
What Did the Defendants Say About This Copyright Infringement?
An OpenAI spokeswoman, Lindsey Held, expressed a commitment to collaborating with content creators to ensure they benefit from AI technology and new revenue models. The representative mentioned productive and constructive conversations with The New York Times and expressed surprise and disappointment at the lawsuit. The hope is to find a mutually beneficial way to work together, similar to collaborations with other publishers.
On the other hand, there has been no response from Microsoft to requests for comment thus far.
Mass Copyright Infringement
The New York Times are a renowned American newspaper and have long been a stalwart in journalism with a rich history dating back to 1851, delivering news and insights to a global audience. They have earned a reputation for journalistic excellence, covering a wide spectrum of topics and shaping public discourse.
In fact, despite this copyright infringement, The New York Times have found themselves at the intersection of technology and media in recent times, engaging in legal battles related to the use of its content in the development of AI.
Media publishers and content creators are encountering their content utilised and transformed by generative AI tools such as ChatGPT, DALL-E, Midjourney, and Stable Diffusion. Frequently, the generated content from these programs bears a resemblance to the source material.
OpenAI have attempted to address the concerns of news publishers. In December, the company revealed a collaboration with Axel Springer, the parent company of Business Insider, Politico, and European outlets Bild and Welt. This partnership involves licencing content to OpenAI in exchange for a fee.
The New York Times’ Action in Response to AI Developments and Copyright Infringement
The lawsuit on the copyright infringement presented an example of how AI systems utilise The Times’s content. It highlighted that Browse With Bing, a Microsoft search feature powered by ChatGPT, replicated results from Wirecutter, The Times’s product review site, almost verbatim. However, the text results from Bing did not include a link to the Wirecutter article and omitted the referral links that Wirecutter relies on to generate commissions from sales based on their recommendations.
Publishers are expressing concerns about the potential impact of generative AI chatbots on news site traffic and revenue. The New York Times are actively exploring the integration of emerging AI technology. Recently, the newspaper appointed an editorial director of AI initiatives to establish protocols for the newsroom’s AI usage and explore ways to incorporate the technology into their journalism.
Also Read: The New Nightshade Data Poisoning Tool Lets Artists Fight Back Against Generative AI
The Copyright Infringement Issue For Now
The New York Times have enlisted the legal expertise of Susman Godfrey and Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck for the lawsuit. Susman, known for representing Dominion Voting Systems in a defamation case against Fox News, secured a $787.5 million settlement. Recently, Susman filed a proposed class action suit against Microsoft and OpenAI on behalf of nonfiction authors, alleging unauthorised use of their copyrighted material for chatbot training.
The outcome of this copyright infringement case remains uncertain, as the defendants have not clearly articulated their position on the matter. We await their response to see how The Times’ allegations of copyright infringement will be resolved. While anticipating developments in this news, why not explore other AI-related articles on our website?