- OpenAI said in a filing in Manhattan federal court on Monday that the allegations in the New York Times complaint did not meet its famously rigorous journalistic standards because its New York Times hired people to hack OpenAI’s products.
- OpenAI did not name the “hired gun” who it said was used by The New York Times to manipulate its system.
- So far, judges have dismissed some infringement claims about the output of generative AI systems, citing a lack of evidence that the AI created content similar to copyrighted works.
“The Times cannot prevent AI models from acquiring knowledge about facts, any more than another news organization can prevent the Times itself from re-reporting stories it had no role in investigating,” OpenAI said.
OpenAI Responds to Lawsuit Allegations
OpenAI has filed a motion urging a federal judge to dismiss parts of the New York Times’ copyright lawsuit. The organisation contends that the newspaper allegedly “hacked” its ChatGPT chatbot and other AI systems to fabricate evidence for the case. OpenAI claims that the Times utilised deceptive prompts, violating its terms of use, leading the technology to replicate its content.
Dispute Over Alleged Hacking
OpenAI asserts that the allegations outlined in the Times’ complaint fail to meet the newspaper’s renowned journalistic standards. The organisation further suggests that the truth behind the matter will unfold during the legal proceedings, alleging that the Times paid an individual to breach OpenAI’s products. Despite these accusations, OpenAI refrains from identifying the alleged individual and does not accuse the Times of violating anti-hacking laws.
The Times’ Lawsuit Against OpenAI and Microsoft
In December, the Times initiated legal action against OpenAI and its primary financial supporter, Microsoft, alleging unauthorised usage of millions of its articles for training chatbots. This lawsuit is part of a broader trend where copyright owners, including authors, visual artists, and music publishers, have taken legal action against technology companies over purported misuse of their content in AI training processes.
