Home / News / Technology / OpenAI Lawsuits: An Overview of ChatGPT’s Courtroom Challenges
Technology
9 min read

OpenAI Lawsuits: An Overview of ChatGPT’s Courtroom Challenges

Last Updated
Giuseppe Ciccomascolo
Last Updated

Key Takeaways

  • OpenAI is facing a series of legal issues related to copyright infringement and the use of other codes for ChatGPT.
  • Key plaintiffs include the New York Times and Elon Musk.
  • OpenAI’s cases are part of a current broader legal trend against big tech corporations.

The Center for Investigative Reporting’s lawsuit against OpenAI is one in a series of disputes surrounding the owner of ChatGPT. From copyright disputes to trademark infringement allegations, the legal team under Sam Altman’s leadership has been kept busy addressing these issues.

Among the plaintiffs taking legal action against OpenAI are prominent entities like the New York Times and Elon Musk, alongside smaller players within the media industry. Below is an overview of the primary legal disputes entangling OpenAI.

Full List Of OpenAI Lawsuits

Here’s a full list of OpenAI lawsuits – both started by OpenAI or by other plaintiffs – as of Aug. 1, 2024:

Plaintiffs Allegation Status
Daily News Lp vs. OpenAI and Microsoft – April 30, 2024 Copyright Infringement Ongoing
Elon Musk vs. OpenAI and Sam Altman – February 29, 2024 Breach Of Contract Ongoing
The New York Times Company vs. Openai – Dec. 27, 2023 Copyright Infringement Ongoing
Sancton vs. OpenAI – Nov. 21, 2023 Copyright Infringement Ongoing
Authors Guild vs. OpenAI – Sept. 19, 2023 Copyright Infringement Ongoing
Chabon vs. OpenAI – Sept. 8, 2023 Copyright Infringement Ongoing
T. vs. OpenAI – Sept. 5, 2023 Breach Of Privacy Laws Ongoing
OpenAI vs. Open Artificial Intelligence, Inc. – Aug. 4, 2023 Trademark Infringement Ongoing
Walters vs. OpenAI – July 14, 2023 Misinformation Ongoing
Silverman vs. OpenAI – July 7, 2023 Copyright Infringement Ongoing
Tremblay vs. OpenAI – June 28, 2023 Copyright Infringement Ongoing
PM vs. OpenAI – June 28, 2023 Privacy Infringement And Unauthorized Data Use Ongoing
Doe 3 vs. OpenAI and GitHub- Nov. 10, 2022 Breach Of Contract Ongoing
Doe 1 vs. OpenAI and GitHub – Nov. 3, 2022 Breach Of Contract Ongoing

The table has been compiled by CCN based on data  provided by Originality.ai.

Top Authors’ Lawsuit Dismissed

A legal setback  emerged on Tuesday, July 30, 2024, for a group of authors suing OpenAI over the unauthorized use of their works to train the ChatGPT AI chatbot.

Despite claims that OpenAI engaged in unfair business practices by using copyrighted material without compensation, a federal judge has narrowed the scope of the case. While the core allegation of direct copyright infringement remains, other claims, including those for unfair competition, have been dismissed.

The court ruled that the Copyright Act preempts state-level claims related to copyrighted material, effectively blocking the authors’ attempt to bypass copyright law. This decision represents a significant hurdle for the plaintiffs, who are seeking to hold OpenAI accountable for allegedly profiting from their work without permission.

The case, which involves high-profile authors such as Sarah Silverman and Ta-Nehisi Coates, is closely watched as it could set a precedent for future disputes over AI training data.

Investigative Journalists Sue OpenAI

The Center for Investigative Reporting, producer of Mother Jones and Reveal, sued  OpenAI and its largest shareholder, Microsoft, in federal court for using nonprofit content without permission or compensation.

CIR, a non-profit newsroom in the US, has registered its copyright for nearly 50 years and focuses on investigative reporting. The lawsuit highlights how AI-generated summaries of articles threaten publishers.

“OpenAI and Microsoft started using our stories to enhance their product without permission or compensation,” said Monika Bauerlein, CEO of CIR. “This free-rider behavior violates copyright and undervalues journalists’ work.”

CIR said AI products gain value from diverse viewpoints and human creativity. “CIR’s unique focus on social justice and power abuses makes its content particularly valuable.”

“For-profit corporations like OpenAI and Microsoft can’t treat-profit publishers’ work as free raw material,” Bauerlein added. “If unchecked, this practice will limit public access to truthful information, replaced by AI summaries.”

The lawsuit, based on violations of the Copyright Act and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act , was filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York.

Elon Musk vs OpenAI

Elon Musk lodged  a complaint alleging that Sam Altman and fellow OpenAI co-founder Gregory Brockman had violated the terms of an agreement established when OpenAI was established in 2015.

At the project’s inception, Musk contributed a substantial portion of the initial funding to OpenAI, which was conceived as a non-profit research organization dedicated to the development of responsible AI systems.

However, Musk has now taken legal action against Altman and Brockman, asserting they breached the contract after OpenAI transitioned into a for-profit entity in 2019.

The complaint contends that OpenAI’s foundational principles, which were initially established in collaboration with Microsoft, have been disregarded.

Contrary to its original ethos as an anonymous open-source initiative, the lawsuit alleges that the new iteration of OpenAI has evolved into a closed-source entity effectively controlled by the world’s largest technology company.

Musk’s lawsuit claims that Altman and Brockman were obligated, under the founding agreement, to develop AI technologies “for the benefit of humanity” rather than for personal or corporate gain.

However, the introduction of the GPT-4 language model signifies, according to the suit, a significant departure from this mission, constituting a breach of the founding agreement.

Latest Development

On Monday, Aug. 5, 2024, Elon Musk revived his lawsuit  against ChatGPT creator OpenAI and its CEO, Sam Altman, alleging that the company prioritizes profits over the public good.

This legal action represents Musk’s ongoing opposition to the startup he co-founded in 2015 and departed from three years later.

Since his departure, OpenAI has emerged as a leading figure in generative AI, while Musk founded a competing startup, xAI, which was valued at $24 billion in May.

The lawsuit seeks a judicial ruling that OpenAI’s licensing agreement with Microsoft to use its AI models is invalid. Musk argues that the language models exceed the scope of OpenAI’s partnership with Microsoft.

Filed in the Northern District of California, the suit mirrors one Musk initiated in February but withdrew in June, just a day before a judge was scheduled to hear OpenAI’s motion to dismiss the case.

New York Times Complaint Over Copyright Infringement

The New York Times has initiated legal action against OpenAI and its investor, a technology giant, on grounds of copyright infringement.

The lawsuit asserts that these entities utilized millions of articles from the newspaper without proper authorization to train their artificial intelligence (AI) models, including the widely recognized AI platforms ChatGPT and Copilot.

The New York Times contends that OpenAI and its AI models, fueled by large language models (LLMs), have produced output that mirrors Times content verbatim, closely summarizes it, and imitates its distinctive style.

The newspaper claims that using its work without permission to develop AI models is a blatant copyright infringement and seeks billions in damages.

Main Copyright Issues

On Nov. 21, 2023, Julian Sancton and fellow writers filed a class-action lawsuit  against OpenAI and Microsoft in the Southern District of New York, alleging copyright infringement for using their works to train ChatGPT.

They argue this use isn’t fair use due to the lack of transformative elements and ChatGPT’s commercial nature. OpenAI and Microsoft dispute this, claiming ChatGPT is transformative and hasn’t replaced the plaintiffs’ works in the market.

Similarly, on Sept. 19, 2023, the Authors Guild and 17 authors filed a class-action lawsuit against OpenAI, also for copyright infringement related to training ChatGPT.

OpenAI denied these claims, asserting ChatGPT is a transformative use that doesn’t displace the plaintiffs’ market.

Pulitzer Winner Among Plaintiffs

In a separate lawsuit  filed on Sept. 8, 2023, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Pulitzer Prize-winning author Michael Chabon and several other writers, including George R.R. Martin, David Henry Hwang, Matthew Klam, Rachel Louise Snyder, and Ayelet Waldman, accused OpenAI of copyright infringement.

The plaintiffs argued that OpenAI unlawfully copied their copyrighted works to train ChatGPT, violating their exclusive rights to reproduce, distribute, and publicly display their works.

They seek injunctive relief to halt OpenAI’s use of their works, along with damages for the profits generated from their unauthorized usage.

OpenAI contested these allegations, asserting that ChatGPT’s utilization of the plaintiffs’ works constitutes fair use due to its transformative nature and the absence of market displacement. It also argued that the plaintiffs had not suffered any damages due to ChatGPT’s operation.

OpenAI vs Open Artificial Intelligence

In a role reversal, OpenAI filed a lawsuit against Open Artificial Intelligence , Inc. on Aug. 4, 2023, in the Northern District of California, alleging trademark infringement and unfair competition for using the “Open AI” mark.

OpenAI claims this has caused “irreparable harm” by damaging its reputation and confusing consumers. They seek a permanent injunction, damages, and legal fees.

The resolution of this case holds broader implications for the technology sector, particularly concerning the use of generic terms in trademarks. In fact, “Artificial intelligence” is a descriptive term commonly employed by numerous tech companies.

Consequently, it remains uncertain whether OpenAI can successfully assert trademark rights in the term “Open AI,” considering its descriptive usage by other entities within the industry.

Older Legal Issues

In 2022, programmers sued GitHub, Microsoft, and OpenAI in Northern California, alleging unauthorized use of their code  to train AI tools and violation of open-source licenses requiring attribution and permission for commercial use.

They also claimed unfair competition, asserting that GitHub and OpenAI gained a competitive edge by using their code for AI development.

The defendants argued their use was fair and transformative, denying any incurred damages as the code remained public.

The plaintiffs accused GitHub and OpenAI of copyright infringement for using their code in Codex and Copilot AI tools and breaching open-source licenses.

In a separate lawsuit , PM accused OpenAI of privacy infringement and unauthorized data use, alleging that ChatGPT’s founder accessed private data, including from minors, without consent for its AI programs ChatGPT and DALL-E.

Broader Lawsuits Against Big Techs

OpenAI is not alone in facing legal challenges. Microsoft and Alphabet, Google’s parent company, are entangled in multiple regulatory battles across Europe. The tech industry as a whole is under increasing scrutiny, with antitrust concerns and data privacy issues at the forefront of these legal disputes.

The growing controversy over AI training data has ensnared another tech giant. Following in the footsteps of ChatGPT’s founder, Google, and Adobe, Nvidia is now facing a class-action lawsuit alleging copyright infringement.

Three authors claim that their works were used without permission to train Nvidia’s NeMo large language model. The crux of the issue lies in using “The Pile,” a massive dataset that includes copyrighted books obtained from a questionable source.

Similar to the lawsuit against Nvidia, the Authors Guild’s complaint focuses on a massive dataset for training large language models. In particular, the Guild alleges that OpenAI utilized a database known as Books2 to develop its AI models without proper authorization or compensation from authors.

Was this Article helpful? Yes No