The intervention supports AI training as fair use, but it does not give technology companies unlimited access to protected content.
NEW YORK, UNITED STATES
The US Justice Department has entered the copyright dispute between The New York Times, OpenAI and Microsoft, supporting the argument that using lawfully accessible publications to train artificial intelligence models can qualify as fair use. The government’s filing expresses a legal position but does not determine the outcome of the case.
The newspaper sued OpenAI and Microsoft in 2023, alleging that millions of copyrighted articles were used without permission or compensation to develop systems including ChatGPT. It also argues that some generated responses reproduce substantial portions of its journalism and may compete with the original publication, threatening the economic model that finances professional reporting.
OpenAI maintains that model training is transformative because the system analyses patterns across enormous collections of material rather than functioning as an archive of individual articles. The Justice Department broadly supports that position, arguing that AI can advance science, creativity, economic development and national security. It also warns that an excessively restrictive interpretation could benefit foreign competitors or only the largest companies capable of purchasing comprehensive licences.
The government’s position does not establish that every use of copyrighted material by an AI company is lawful. American courts assess fair use through several factors, including the purpose of the use, the nature and amount of the work copied and the effect on its potential market. Obtaining material unlawfully, reproducing protected expression in outputs or creating a direct substitute for the original work could produce a different legal conclusion.
The New York Times criticised the intervention as favouring powerful technology companies over the creators whose work supplies valuable training material. The court must now decide whether AI training is sufficiently transformative and whether its economic benefits outweigh the potential damage to publishers. Its eventual ruling could reshape licensing negotiations, journalism’s financial sustainability and the legal foundations of the global AI industry.
Detrás de cada dato, la intención. / Behind every data point, the intention.