A group of news organizations, including the New York Times, asked a federal judge on July 9 to sanction OpenAI over claims that the company withheld evidence in a copyright dispute over its AI training practices, according to court filings reviewed by TechCrunch. The outlets accuse OpenAI of deliberately failing to preserve training data and output logs that could show how ChatGPT reproduces their copyrighted journalism, and they are seeking attorneys’ fees and a finding that ChatGPT outputs regurgitate their reporting.
What are the outlets alleging?
The newspapers accused OpenAI of deliberately failing to preserve training data and output logs that could reveal how ChatGPT reproduces their copyrighted journalism. According to the filing, OpenAI "intentionally hid its discovery capabilities" for two years, misrepresenting its ability to search its own training corpus and customer chat logs.
The filing stated: "There is no question that it happened. Nor should there be one about what was copied, how often or to what end."
What do the outlets want the court to do?
The plaintiffs asked the court to find that ChatGPT outputs show "substantial and systematic grounding on and regurgitation" of their reporting, and to order OpenAI to pay attorneys’ fees.
The request follows earlier court orders requiring OpenAI to preserve all ChatGPT conversations, including deleted ones, and to hand over 20 million anonymized chat logs to the plaintiffs.
What is the background of the lawsuit?
The New York Times sued OpenAI and its backer Microsoft in December 2023, alleging that the company infringed copyright by training its generative AI models on millions of NYT articles without permission. The suit was later consolidated with similar complaints from other news organizations.
How are courts treating AI training and fair use?
Courts have reached conflicting conclusions on whether training AI on copyrighted material qualifies as fair use:
- In June 2025, a federal judge ruled that Anthropic’s training on lawfully acquired books constituted fair use.
- In October 2025, a separate judge allowed a class-action lawsuit by authors including George R.R. Martin to proceed, finding that AI outputs can be substantially similar to copyrighted works.
- In March 2026, Encyclopedia Britannica and Merriam-Webster filed a separate suit alleging "massive copyright infringement."
- Actress Sarah Silverman joined authors Richard Kadrey and Christopher Golden in suing both OpenAI and Meta in 2023.
What is OpenAI’s position?
OpenAI has maintained that training on publicly available material is protected under the fair use doctrine, and that ChatGPT rarely regurgitates newspaper articles verbatim. The company argues its systems learn general patterns rather than store specific copies. OpenAI did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the sanction motion.
Former OpenAI researcher Suchir Balaji, who publicly argued that the company’s data collection violated copyright laws, was found dead in his San Francisco apartment in November 2024. His earlier blog post had reportedly made "a strong case for copyright infringement by OpenAI."
Why does this sanction request matter?
The outcome of the sanction request could shape the scope of discovery in a case that already involves the compelled production of more than 20 million user conversations. The proliferation of cases reflects a broader crisis in digital copyright as AI companies ingest vast amounts of online content without explicit licenses.
"We’re seeing a rapid decline in consent to use data across the web that will have ramifications not just for AI companies, but for researchers, academics, and noncommercial entities," researcher Shayne Longpre told the New York Times in mid-2024.
FAQ
What did news outlets ask the court to do in the OpenAI copyright case?
On July 9, a group of news organizations led by the New York Times asked a federal judge to sanction OpenAI for allegedly withholding evidence for two years. They want the court to find that ChatGPT outputs show substantial regurgitation of their reporting and to order OpenAI to pay attorneys’ fees.
What evidence do the outlets say OpenAI withheld?
The plaintiffs allege OpenAI deliberately failed to preserve training data and output logs that could reveal how ChatGPT reproduces their copyrighted journalism, and that the company "intentionally hid its discovery capabilities" by misrepresenting its ability to search its training corpus and customer chat logs.
How has OpenAI responded to the sanction motion?
OpenAI has maintained that training on publicly available material is protected by fair use and that ChatGPT rarely reproduces newspaper articles verbatim. The company did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the sanction motion.
Related coverage
Run a free scan to see your AI Visibility Score, SEO rating, and local citation accuracy.