The New York Times’ copyright case against OpenAI and Microsoft
Law & Courts
Last updated
The big picture
The New York Times and other publishers argue that AI companies used their reporting without permission and built products that can compete with the original work. OpenAI and Microsoft dispute the claims and rely in part on fair use, a legal doctrine that allows some uses of copyrighted material without a license. The dispute is not simply whether an AI system has encountered an article. It concerns how material was used, what the services produce and whether the publishers’ markets are harmed. In 2026, the case moved into arguments over whether the judge can decide key issues without a trial. Internal company communications are evidence in that dispute, not findings of wrongdoing by themselves.
Where things stand
As of September 17, both sides had sought rulings on major issues before trial. Publishers argued that AI products could substitute for their reporting; the companies defended their use of the material. This dated account does not establish a final judgment or subsequent trial outcome.
Key facts
- Fair use is a legal defense to be evaluated in context, not a blanket exemption for every AI use.
- A quotation in a court filing is evidence offered by a party, not automatically a judicial finding.
- Rulings in other AI cases may inform arguments without resolving this lawsuit.
How we got here
The parties submit motions seeking decisions on major issues without trial.
The case’s next stage is described as awaiting the judge’s response to those motions.
Unsealed executive communications become part of the publishers’ argument over substitution and market harm.
What happens next
No further event was confirmed at the last update.
Related Daily Edition coverage
- No related edition articles have been linked yet.