DOJ Backs OpenAI in NYT Copyright Case
DOJ backs OpenAI in NYT copyright case and frames LLM training as fair use, warning licensing would favor big firms; investors will watch litigation risk.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
- DOJ filed a statement backing OpenAI's fair-use defense in the New York Times copyright suit.
- The brief argues LLM training is extraordinarily transformative and generally qualifies as fair use.
- It may be cited across related suits to bolster defenses and limit litigation risk for AI firms.
HIGH POTENTIAL TRADES SENT DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Add your email to receive our free daily newsletter. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.
The U.S. Department of Justice filed a statement of interest on Sept. 1, 2026, in Manhattan federal court supporting OpenAI’s defense in the New York Times copyright lawsuit. The filing argues that training large language models (LLMs) on copyrighted text generally qualifies as fair use and warns that restricting this practice would harm scientific progress, economic competitiveness, and national security.
DOJ Legal Argument
The Justice Department’s roughly 20-page filing in the Southern District of New York frames training LLMs as “extraordinarily” transformative. It explains that these models use copyrighted texts to develop generalized reasoning and language skills rather than to reproduce entire works. The filing urges courts to adopt a broad fair-use standard for AI training, asserting that copying material to train models does not create significant substitutive competition for the original works.
The brief cautions that requiring licenses for training data would impede scientific advancement, weaken U.S. economic competitiveness, and raise national-security concerns. It emphasizes that LLMs are already aiding researchers across scientific and technical fields, reinforcing the public interest in allowing broad fair use for AI training.
Litigation and Market Impact
The lawsuit, filed in 2023, alleges that OpenAI—and in some versions Microsoft—used millions of news articles without permission to train its models. Plaintiffs include major news organizations such as The New York Times Company and the Chicago Tribune, along with authors like Sylvia Day, George R.R. Martin, and John Grisham. Related claims from publishers, record labels, and tens of thousands of authors form a broader wave of litigation targeting AI training practices.
This filing marks the first formal intervention by the U.S. government in this wave of cases. Submitted to U.S. District Judge Sidney Stein, the document highlights divergent rulings by other courts on whether training on copyrighted material qualifies as fair use, underscoring unsettled law that this court must now consider.
The Justice Department warns that imposing licensing requirements for training data would skew competition, favoring only the largest companies able to absorb licensing costs. This could reshape market entry and competition across the AI industry, potentially limiting innovation and consolidating power among a few dominant firms.
The filing is expected to bolster defenses for tech companies facing similar copyright claims by signaling federal support for treating AI training as fair use. It may become a key reference in ongoing and future litigation over AI training practices.
