Seattle Times and Newsday are the latest publications to sue OpenAI and Microsoft

In a significant development for the evolving landscape of artificial intelligence and digital rights, two more prominent news organizations, The Seattle Times and Newsday, have filed separate lawsuits against AI giants OpenAI and Microsoft. The lawsuits, lodged on Friday, September 4, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, accuse the tech companies of unlawfully using their copyrighted journalistic content to train and operate their sophisticated AI systems.

This legal action adds to a growing wave of challenges from content creators who contend that their work is being exploited without permission or compensation to fuel the development of powerful generative AI models.

The Core of the Allegations: Copyright Infringement and Unfair Competition

The complaints from both The Seattle Times and Newsday center on allegations that OpenAI and Microsoft "scraped" their websites, including content behind paywalls, and incorporated hundreds of thousands of their articles into the datasets used to train products like ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, and Bing's AI features.

The news organizations argue that these AI products can reproduce passages from their reporting, closely paraphrase articles, and provide users with answers that diminish the need to visit their websites or subscribe to their services. This, they claim, directly undermines their business models and the significant investments made in producing original journalism. Seattle Times President and CEO Alan Fisco stated, "We feel strongly that we must defend our content - which we spend millions of dollars a year to produce - from being used without our consent or compensation."

Newsday echoed this sentiment, with a spokesperson emphasizing the need to protect their unique content and the investments made in it, stating, "While both Newsday and The Seattle Times support responsible AI innovation, it is also imperative that we protect the significant investments we have made in our respective unique content." The lawsuit describes generative AI trained on "painstakingly researched, expensive-to-produce content" as a "snake eating its own tail," threatening to destroy the very news organizations it relies upon by competing directly with them through AI-generated substitutive content.

Beyond copyright infringement, The Seattle Times also accused OpenAI of diluting their trademarks by generating fabricated content falsely attributed to the newspaper.

Who is Suing Whom? The Parties Involved

The plaintiffs in these lawsuits are The Seattle Times Company, the parent company of the largest daily newspaper in the Pacific Northwest, and Newsday LLC, a major suburban daily based on Long Island, New York.

The defendants are OpenAI, the developer behind the widely popular ChatGPT, and Microsoft, a significant investor and partner in OpenAI, which has integrated OpenAI's technology into its own products like Copilot and Bing AI.

The "Training Data" Debate: Fair Use vs. Copyright Protection

At the heart of these and similar lawsuits is the contentious issue of how AI models are trained. Large Language Models (LLMs) require immense amounts of text data to learn patterns, language, and facts. AI companies often scrape vast quantities of publicly available information from the internet, including news articles, books, and other copyrighted works, to build these training datasets.

OpenAI has consistently argued that its models are trained on publicly available data and that this practice is "grounded in fair use." Fair use is a legal doctrine in U.S. copyright law that permits limited use of copyrighted material without acquiring permission from the rights holders for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research. OpenAI and Microsoft contend that their use is transformative because the AI models learn from the content to generate new material, serving a different purpose than the original works.

However, news organizations and other content creators strongly dispute this "fair use" argument. They assert that the AI systems are not merely learning from their content but are effectively repackaging and reproducing it, thereby directly competing with and devaluing their original work. They argue that this unauthorized use deprives them of revenue and threatens the very existence of high-quality, independent journalism.

Precedents and a Growing Legal Battleground

The lawsuits from The Seattle Times and Newsday are not isolated incidents; they are part of a broader and intensifying legal battle between AI developers and content creators. The most prominent of these preceding cases is the lawsuit filed by The New York Times against OpenAI and Microsoft in December 2023.

The New York Times' complaint also accused the companies of using millions of its articles without permission to train AI models, alleging "systematic and competitive infringement." That case, which has seen significant legal maneuvering, including a U.S. Justice Department brief siding with the tech companies on the fair use argument, is still ongoing.

Other publishers, including The Chicago Tribune, The Denver Post, and the New York Daily News, have also filed similar lawsuits. Beyond news organizations, a coalition of authors, including notable names like John Grisham, Jodi Picoult, and George R.R. Martin, have sued OpenAI, alleging that their copyrighted books were used to train ChatGPT without consent or compensation.

The legal challenges extend to other AI companies as well. Anthropic, another AI firm, reportedly reached a $1.5 billion settlement last year with authors and publishers who accused it of using copyrighted books to train its Claude models. This settlement highlights the potential financial stakes involved in these disputes. Moreover, there have been reports of OpenAI employees discussing the deletion of a pirated books dataset, which could have significant implications for potential willful infringement claims and enhanced damages.

While some publishers, such as The Washington Post and News Corp. (owner of The Wall Street Journal), have opted to strike licensing deals with OpenAI, the ongoing litigation suggests a deep divide in how the value of journalistic content in the AI era should be recognized and compensated.

OpenAI and Microsoft's Responses

In response to these lawsuits, OpenAI has generally maintained that its models are trained on publicly available data and that its practices are "grounded in fair use." A spokesperson for OpenAI stated that this approach helps "hundreds of millions of people improve their daily lives and delivers benefits such as empowering human creativity, science, and medical research."

Microsoft has expressed "surprise" at the lawsuits, acknowledging the importance of local journalism and indicating a willingness to "sit down and explore solutions to this type of dispute."

Both companies have consistently argued that AI training on publicly available text falls within fair use and that the model outputs are transformative rather than direct substitutes for original works.

Implications for the News Industry

These lawsuits carry profound implications for the news industry. Publishers argue that if AI companies are allowed to freely use copyrighted content for training, it could severely undermine their ability to fund quality journalism. This could lead to reduced revenue, fewer reporters, less original reporting, and ultimately, a less informed public. The ability of AI chatbots to "regurgitate information produced by news outlets" and allow users to bypass subscriptions or website visits directly impacts traditional revenue streams.

The outcome of these cases could force AI companies to negotiate licensing agreements and compensate publishers for the use of their content, potentially creating new revenue streams for struggling news organizations. Alternatively, a ruling in favor of AI companies could further exacerbate the financial challenges faced by the news industry.

Implications for the AI Industry

For the AI industry, the stakes are equally high. A ruling in favor of content creators could significantly impact how AI models are developed and trained. It might necessitate stricter controls over training data acquisition, requiring AI companies to secure licenses or explicit permission for copyrighted materials. This could increase development costs and potentially slow down the pace of AI innovation if access to vast datasets becomes more restricted or expensive.

The legal landscape for AI is still in its early stages, and these cases are crucial in defining the "borders of the legality" within the generative AI space. The Justice Department's stance, arguing that barring AI training on copyrighted material could "severely hamper 'the Progress of Science and useful Arts,'" highlights the tension between protecting intellectual property and fostering technological advancement.

The Road Ahead

The lawsuits filed by The Seattle Times and Newsday, along with other ongoing litigation, will likely be lengthy and complex. They involve intricate legal arguments around fair use, copyright, and the transformative nature of AI. The courts will need to weigh the rights of content creators against the potential societal benefits and innovative capacity of AI technology.

The requested relief in these lawsuits includes financial damages and court orders for the "impoundment and/or destruction" of training datasets and AI models that incorporate the newspapers' articles. The outcomes could set significant precedents for the future of AI development, content licensing, and the economic models of both the tech and media industries.

Conclusion

The legal challenges posed by The Seattle Times and Newsday against OpenAI and Microsoft underscore a fundamental conflict emerging in the digital age: how to balance the rapid advancements of AI with the established rights of content creators. These cases are not just about copyright; they are about the future of journalism, the value of human creativity, and the ethical foundations of artificial intelligence. As these legal battles unfold, their resolutions will undoubtedly shape the regulatory framework and commercial practices for AI technology for years to come.

Frequently Asked Questions

What are The Seattle Times and Newsday suing OpenAI and Microsoft for?

The Seattle Times and Newsday are suing OpenAI and Microsoft for alleged copyright infringement. They claim that the tech companies used their journalistic content without permission or compensation to train their AI models, such as ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, and Bing's AI features.

What is the main argument made by the news organizations?

The news organizations argue that OpenAI and Microsoft "scraped" their websites, including paywalled content, and incorporated their articles into AI training datasets. They allege that the AI products can then reproduce or closely paraphrase their content, reducing the need for users to visit their websites or subscribe, thereby undermining their business models and investments in journalism.

How have OpenAI and Microsoft responded to these allegations?

OpenAI generally maintains that its models are trained on publicly available data and that this use falls under "fair use" doctrine. Microsoft has expressed surprise at the lawsuits but acknowledged the importance of local journalism and indicated a willingness to discuss potential solutions.

Are there other similar lawsuits against AI companies?

Yes, these lawsuits are part of a growing trend. The New York Times filed a similar lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft in December 2023. Additionally, various authors and other publishers have sued OpenAI and other AI companies like Anthropic and Meta over the alleged unauthorized use of their copyrighted works for AI training.