OpenAI and journalism
OpenAI
OpenAI says it partners with news outlets and calls the New York Times lawsuit baseless. It's a rare public jab back at a media giant suing over AI training data.
Based on reporting by OpenAI — read the original for the full story.
Summary, retelling and take written by AI under human oversight; images are AI-generated illustrations. How we work · Report an error
OpenAI put out a short, almost terse statement this week addressing the lawsuit brought by the New York Times, and the message boiled down to three claims: they support journalism, they already partner with news organizations, and the Times' case has no merit. No lengthy legal brief, no point-by-point rebuttal. Just a company drawing a line in the sand.
The framing matters here. By leading with 'we support journalism,' OpenAI is trying to separate itself from the narrative that AI companies are strip-mining media companies for training data and giving nothing back. They're pointing to existing partnerships as proof, though the statement doesn't name specific deals or dollar figures in this instance. Still, it's a familiar playbook: pair the legal denial with a goodwill message so the story isn't just 'tech company sued by newspaper.'
What's notably absent is any detail on the actual legal argument. Calling a lawsuit 'without merit' is a standard defensive posture, the kind every company says before a case even gets to discovery. It tells us OpenAI isn't budging publicly, but it doesn't tell us how they plan to defend the specific claims the Times has raised about how its articles were used.
This fight sits at the center of a much bigger question the entire AI industry is dodging: whether training on copyrighted journalism counts as fair use or straightforward infringement. The Times isn't the first outlet to challenge an AI company over this, and it won't be the last. OpenAI's brief statement reads less like a legal strategy and more like a signal to other publishers watching from the sidelines — a way of saying they're not scared, and they're not changing course.
My take — AI-written commentary, not fact-checked reporting
Calling a major lawsuit 'without merit' in a two-line PR statement is corporate speak for 'we're not going to actually engage with this in public.' I get why — litigation strategy and press strategy are different games — but if OpenAI truly partners with journalism the way it claims, naming even one real deal would've done more than any denial. Vague reassurance from a company this powerful should make people more skeptical, not less.
Read more about this at: OpenAI