How will the legal standoff between OpenAI and the world-famous news publication end?
OpenAI asked Manhattan Federal court to dismiss part of The New York Times ' claims, accusing the newspaper of "hacking" its chatbot ChatGPT and other artificial intelligence systems to create misleading evidence in the case.
Recall that the lawsuit against OpenAI and its largest financial partner Microsoft was filed in late December. It claims that companies used millions of New York Times (NYT) articles without permission to train their language models, which now operate on facts from these articles and compete with news agencies as a source of reliable information.
It is noteworthy that this case is far from the first time that copyright holders have accused technology companies of illegally using their materials for AI training. So, earlier, the Getty Images photostock sued Stability AI for inconsistent use of the service's images for training a generative neural network.
As for ChatGPT, OpenAI claims that the NYT forced the neural network to reproduce its materials using " deceptive requests that clearly violate the OpenAI terms of use."
In its statement, OpenAI criticizes the newspaper for failing to meet its "famous standards of journalism" and accuses it of hiring an outsider to manipulate AI systems, although it does not directly accuse the newspaper of violating laws.
In response, NYT lawyer Ian Crosby said that the actions described by OpenAI as "hacking" are in fact the legal use of the company's products to find evidence of copying and reproducing the newspaper's copyrighted materials.
Technology companies often claim that their AI systems fairly use the author's material, or do not use it at all. However, as a rule, it is not possible to reliably verify this to third parties.
Undoubtedly, such lawsuits, while designed to protect copyright holders, also threaten the growth of a potentially multibillion-dollar AI industry that has a digital future behind it.
The question of whether AI training on copyrighted materials qualifies as "fair" has yet to be resolved by the courts. In the meantime, OpenAI expressed confidence in the victory in a statement based on the issue of fair use of materials.
OpenAI stressed that the newspaper cannot prevent artificial intelligence from gaining knowledge about facts, just as any other news organization cannot prohibit the NYT from reprinting stories in the investigation of which it was not directly involved.
OpenAI asked Manhattan Federal court to dismiss part of The New York Times ' claims, accusing the newspaper of "hacking" its chatbot ChatGPT and other artificial intelligence systems to create misleading evidence in the case.
Recall that the lawsuit against OpenAI and its largest financial partner Microsoft was filed in late December. It claims that companies used millions of New York Times (NYT) articles without permission to train their language models, which now operate on facts from these articles and compete with news agencies as a source of reliable information.
It is noteworthy that this case is far from the first time that copyright holders have accused technology companies of illegally using their materials for AI training. So, earlier, the Getty Images photostock sued Stability AI for inconsistent use of the service's images for training a generative neural network.
As for ChatGPT, OpenAI claims that the NYT forced the neural network to reproduce its materials using " deceptive requests that clearly violate the OpenAI terms of use."
In its statement, OpenAI criticizes the newspaper for failing to meet its "famous standards of journalism" and accuses it of hiring an outsider to manipulate AI systems, although it does not directly accuse the newspaper of violating laws.
In response, NYT lawyer Ian Crosby said that the actions described by OpenAI as "hacking" are in fact the legal use of the company's products to find evidence of copying and reproducing the newspaper's copyrighted materials.
Technology companies often claim that their AI systems fairly use the author's material, or do not use it at all. However, as a rule, it is not possible to reliably verify this to third parties.
Undoubtedly, such lawsuits, while designed to protect copyright holders, also threaten the growth of a potentially multibillion-dollar AI industry that has a digital future behind it.
The question of whether AI training on copyrighted materials qualifies as "fair" has yet to be resolved by the courts. In the meantime, OpenAI expressed confidence in the victory in a statement based on the issue of fair use of materials.
OpenAI stressed that the newspaper cannot prevent artificial intelligence from gaining knowledge about facts, just as any other news organization cannot prohibit the NYT from reprinting stories in the investigation of which it was not directly involved.
