NYT v. OpenAI, explained

The New York Times sued OpenAI and Microsoft in December 2023 in the Southern District of New York, alleging its articles were used to train GPT models without a licence. It is the most consequential test of fair use for training on journalism.

Why it matters to a buyer

Because the case is unresolved, some buyers read it as no signal. It has already survived motions to dismiss, which means the infringement claims were plausible enough to reach discovery — and that alone reprices unlicensed journalism in a corpus. Any lab holding news content without a licence is carrying this docket as open exposure.

Why it matters to a data owner

Publishers do not need to wait for a verdict to license. The suit is why unlicensed use of journalism now carries a number, and why licensed supply carries terms instead of risk.

Current legal status

Filed December 2023 in the Southern District of New York, and now part of consolidated multidistrict litigation there; as of July 2026 the case remains in discovery. It survived motions to dismiss in 2025. On January 5, 2026, Judge Stein affirmed an order requiring OpenAI to produce a sample of 20 million de-identified ChatGPT conversation logs. After OpenAI’s corporate designee was found unprepared, the court ordered a re-deposition, which took place in April 2026. On July 9, 2026, the Times and other news plaintiffs moved for sanctions, accusing OpenAI of obstructing discovery; OpenAI disputes the allegations and the motion is pending. No court has ruled on the merits of fair use here — treat any summary that names a winner as wrong.

What fiund does about it

Every asset fiund lists carries a signed licence with explicit AI-training rights, so buyers are not betting a corpus on how this docket resolves.

Sources

← All rights & provenance guides