Two news organizations, The Seattle Times and Newsday, filed suit Sept. 4 against OpenAI and Microsoft, alleging the companies used their journalism to train artificial intelligence models without permission or compensation.
The complaint characterizes generative AI products like ChatGPT and Copilot as "rapacious consumers" that extract human-authored content and deliver copies or derivative versions to achieve commercial objectives. The publishers argue the journalism industry could become "broken beyond repair" if AI companies continue training on copyrighted work without licensing deals.
This follows a similar 2023 lawsuit by The New York Times against OpenAI and Microsoft. Other publications have initiated legal proceedings as that case progresses.
The Seattle Times' participation is notable given that Microsoft and OpenAI previously funded some of the paper's journalism projects and fellowships.
Microsoft told GeekWire it was "surprised by the lawsuit" and said it is "always happy to sit down and explore solutions to this type of dispute."
The economic tension is straightforward: training large language models requires vast datasets, yet publishers receive no compensation when their content fuels AI systems that compete with their own business. The legal challenge questions whether content creation remains viable if its output is freely consumed by AI operators for commercial gain.
These lawsuits highlight a core dispute in AI development. Developers rely on existing human-generated data to build models; content creators seek compensation and legal protection for intellectual property that underpins their revenue. The outcome could establish precedents for how AI models are trained and how creators are paid.
