Trump Administration Backs OpenAI in New York Times Copyright Lawsuit
7 sources across 5 countries
Who reported this
- The Guardian
- Reuters
- The Intercept
- WIRED
- Folha de S.Paulo
- Le Monde
- Rappler
What the colours mean
- Left
- Centre-left
- Centre
- Centre-right
- Right
- A hatched block means the outlet is affiliated with, or controlled by, a state.
Political lean describes where an outlet sits within the politics of its own country. It is never a position on a single global scale.
Political lean is comparable inside one country and not across them, which is why the bar groups by country first. Publicly funded broadcasters are not marked as state-linked.
The owner of each outlet is listed as a matter of record, not as a judgement about the outlet.
The United States Department of Justice has filed a brief in a federal court in New York supporting OpenAI in its legal battle against the New York Times. The government argues that training large language models on copyrighted material constitutes fair use and is essential for the United States to maintain global leadership in artificial intelligence. The filing, submitted on Tuesday, September 1, asserts that such training is extraordinarily transformative and does not violate copyright law. According to the administration, restricting this process would hinder scientific progress, national security, and economic mobility. The New York Times, which sued OpenAI and Microsoft in 2023, claims the companies used millions of its articles without permission to develop ChatGPT. A spokesperson for the newspaper stated that the administration is siding with trillion dollar AI companies at the expense of American creators. The government's intervention is described as unusual and historical, as it marks the first time the U.S. government has weighed in on these ongoing copyright disputes. Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward Jr. stated on X that AI dominance is critical to promote national security and prosperity. Other plaintiffs, including the Author's Guild and The Intercept, have expressed disappointment, arguing that the position threatens the financial survival of media outlets and represents an uncompensated transfer of intellectual property rights. While the brief is advisory and not legally binding, legal experts suggest it carries significant weight because it originates from the Department of Justice.
How each side framed it
- Left
- This framing characterized the government's position as a permit for tech giants to rip off creative work and a threat to the survival of independent media.
- Centre-left
- These outlets focused on the tension between AI innovation and the rights of creators, highlighting the potential harm to journalism.
- Centre
- These reports emphasized the economic and national security justifications provided by the government while noting the personal conflicts between Trump and the New York Times.
Sources
- Centre Folha de S.Paulo: Trump government sides with OpenAI in lawsuit against The New York Times
- Centre-left Le Monde: AI: the Trump administration defends OpenAI's right to use New York Times archives without paying royalties
- Centre-left Rappler: US government backs OpenAI in New York Times copyright case
- Centre Reuters: US government backs OpenAI in New York Times copyright case - Reuters
- Centre-left The Guardian: Trump administration sides with OpenAI in lawsuit against New York Times
- Left The Intercept: Trump Admin Tells Court: Let OpenAI Rip Off The Intercept’s Articles
- Centre-left WIRED: Trump Administration Sides With OpenAI in New York Times Copyright Lawsuit
100% of the statements in this article were traced back to the source articles listed above.