New York Times sues Microsoft, ChatGPT maker OpenAI over copyright infringement
The New York Times on Wednesday filed a lawsuit against Microsoft and OpenAI, creator of the popular AI chatbot ChatGPT, accusing the companies of copyright infringement and abusing the newspaper’s intellectual property to train large language models.
Microsoft both invests in and supplies OpenAI, providing it with access to the company’s Azure cloud computing technology.
The publisher said in a filing in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York that it seeks to hold Microsoft and OpenAI to account for the “billions of dollars in statutory and actual damages” it believes it is owed for the “unlawful copying and use of The Times’s uniquely valuable works.”
The Times said in an emailed statement that it “recognizes the power and potential of GenAI for the public and for journalism,” but added that journalistic material should be used for commercial gain with permission from the original source.
“These tools were built with and continue to use independent journalism and content that is only available because we and our peers reported, edited, and fact-checked it at high cost and with considerable expertise,” the Times said.
The New York Times Building in New York City on February 1, 2022.
Angela Weiss | AFP | Getty Images
“Settled copyright law protects our journalism and content,” the Times added. “If Microsoft and OpenAI want to use our work for commercial purposes, the law requires that they first obtain our permission. They have not done so.”
“We respect the rights of content creators and owners and are committed to working with them to ensure they benefit from AI technology and new revenue models,” an OpenAI representative said in a statement. “Our ongoing conversations with the New York Times have been productive and moving forward constructively, so we are surprised and disappointed with this development. We’re hopeful that we will find a mutually beneficial way to work together, as we are doing with many other publishers.”
A representative for Microsoft didn’t respond to requests for comment.
The Times is represented in the proceedings by Susman Godfrey, the litigation firm that represented Dominion Voting Systems in its defamation suit against Fox News that culminated in a $787.5 million million settlement.
Susman Godfrey is also representing author Julian Sancton and other writers in a separate lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft that accuses the companies of using copyrighted materials without permission to train several versions of ChatGPT.
‘Mass copyright infringement’
The Times is one of numerous media organizations pursuing compensation from companies behind some of the most advanced artificial intelligence models, for the alleged usage of their content to train AI programs.
OpenAI is the creator of GPT, a large language model that can produce humanlike content in response to user prompts. It uses billions of parameters’ worth of information, which is obtained from public web data up until 2021.
Media publishers and content creators are finding their materials being used and reimagined by generative AI tools like ChatGPT, Dall-E, Midjourney and Stable Diffusion. In numerous cases, the content the programs produce can look similar to the source material.
OpenAI has tried to allay news publishers’ concerns. In December, the company announced a partnership with Axel Springer — the parent company of Business Insider, Politico, and European outlets Bild and Welt — which would license its content to OpenAI in return for a fee.
The financial terms of the deal weren’t disclosed.
In its lawsuit Wednesday, the Times accused Microsoft and OpenAI of creating a business model based on “mass copyright infringement,” stating that the companies’ AI systems were “used to create multiple reproductions of The Times’s intellectual property for the purpose of creating the GPT models that exploit and, in many cases, retain large portions of the copyrightable expression contained in those works.”
Publishers are concerned that, with the advent of generative AI chatbots, fewer people will click through to news sites, resulting in shrinking traffic and revenues.
The Times included numerous examples in the suit of instances where GPT-4 produced altered versions of material published by the newspaper.
In one example, the filing shows OpenAI’s software producing almost identical text to a Times article about predatory lending practices in New York City’s taxi industry.
But in OpenAI’s version, GPT-4 excludes a critical piece of context about the sum of money the city made selling taxi medallions and collecting taxes on private sales.
In its suit, the Times said Microsoft and OpenAI’s GPT models “directly compete with Times content.”
The AI models also limited the Times’ commercial opportunities by altering its content. For example, the publisher alleges GPT outputs remove links to products featured in its Wirecutter app, a product reviews platform, “thereby depriving The Times of the opportunity to receive referral revenue and appropriating that opportunity for Defendants.”
The Times also alleged Microsoft and OpenAI models produce content similar to that generated by the newspaper, and that their use of its content to train LLMs without consent “constitutes free-riding on The Times’s significant efforts and investment of human capital to gather this information.”
The Times said Microsoft and OpenAI’s LLMs “can generate output that recites Times content verbatim, closely summarizes it, and mimics its expressive style,” and “wrongly attribute false information to The Times,” and “deprive The Times of subscription, licensing, advertising, and affiliate revenue.”
— CNBC’s Rohan Goswami contributed to this report.
Don’t miss these stories from CNBC PRO:
Max Levchin, co-founder of PayPal and chief executive officer of financial technology company Affirm, arrives at the Sun Valley Resort for the annual Allen & Company Sun Valley Conference, in Sun Valley, Idaho.
Drew Angerer | Getty Images
Affirm shares rose 15% in extended trading on Thursday after the provider of buy now, pay later loans reported better-than-expected earnings and revenue for the fiscal fourth quarter.
Here’s how the company did versus LSEG consensus estimates:
- EPS: 20 cents vs. 11 cents estimated
- Revenue: $876 million vs. $837 million estimated
Revenue climbed 33% in the period from $659 million in the same quarter a year earlier. Gross merchandise volume rose 43% to $10.4 billion from $7.2 billion a year ago.
Affirm reported net income of $69.2 million, or 20 cents a share, after recording a loss a year earlier of $45.1 million, or 14 cents a share.
“This consistent execution led Affirm to achieve operating income profitability in FQ4’25 – right on the schedule we committed to a year ago,” the company said in its shareholder letter.
For the first quarter, Affirm said revenue will be between $855 million and $885 million, while gross merchandise volume will be $10.1 billion to 10.4 billion.
Shares of Affirm were up 31% this year before the after-hours pop, topping the Nasdaq’s 12% gain.
Affirm, which went public in 2021, faces growing competition in e-commerce. It has partnerships with Amazon and Shopify, but Walmart recently shifted to competitor Klarna, which is expected to go public in the near future. Last year, Affirm announced a deal with Apple.
Elon Musk reacts during a press event with U.S. President Donald Trump (not pictured), at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., May 30, 2025.
Nathan Howard | Reuters
Elon Musk’s fervent promotion of Tesla‘s self-driving technology isn’t doing much to win over prospective buyers.
According to a new survey, more U.S. consumers say that Tesla’s FSD, or Full Self-Driving (Supervised) systems, would push them away from the brand rather than drawing them to it.
The Electric Vehicle Intelligence Report for August, published by political consulting firm Slingshot Strategies, polled 8,000 Americans. Only 14% of those surveyed said FSD would make them more likely to buy a Tesla, while 35% said the technology would make them less likely to purchase one.
The remaining 51% said the availability of FSD would make no difference to them in terms of their car buying decisions. Nearly half of consumers surveyed by Slingshot said they think FSD technology should be illegal.
For Tesla, the troubling results land in the middle of a sales slump resulting from an aging lineup of electric vehicles and increased competition from rivals. There’s also reputational damage in response to Musk, his incendiary political rhetoric, work with the Trump administration and support of Germany’s far-right AfD party.
Sales of Tesla cars in Europe plunged 40% in July from a year earlier, the seventh consecutive month of declines.
In the robotaxi market, Tesla is lagging Alphabet-owned Waymo, and Baidu’s Apollo Go. It’s now in the early stages of testing a ride-hailing service in Austin, Texas, and in the San Francisco Bay Area, with hopes to reach more cities this year. Cars in Austin have human supervisors on board, while those in San Francisco have drivers at the wheel.
Musk, the world’s richest person, has said the future of Tesla hangs on its ability to deliver autonomous vehicles and related services. He recently said a new variant of the Model Y, which launched in China, won’t “start production in the U.S. until the end of next year,” and “might not ever, given the advent of self-driving in America.”
For now, Tesla still relies on EV sales for the vast majority of its revenue, though Musk has touted FSD as one of the company’s big advantages over competitors.
Last month, executives suggested that Tesla has a market education problem when it comes to driving adoption of FSD.
“The vast majority of people don’t know it exists,” Musk said on the company’s second-quarter earnings call. “And it’s still like half of Tesla owners who could use it, haven’t tried it even once.”
Musk said he would start telling customers about FSD when they bring their cars in for service, and would begin reaching out to drivers, sending them videos of how it works.
Tesla CFO Vaibhav Taneja said on the July earnings call that people who subscribe to the premium FSD option get something like a “personal chauffeur” for about $3.33 a day.
The version of FSD Supervised that Tesla sells today is available to owners for $99 per month or an up-front purchase. The system gives users a limited set of self-driving capabilities on residential and city streets.
On Thursday, Tesla sent out a promotion offering 0% APR financing for customers ordering a new Model 3 by Sept. 1, as long as they add FSD Supervised to their order, or transfer it from their previously owned Tesla.
‘Holding AV manufacturers responsible’
Musk has said in posts on X that FSD can “can operate in all conditions,” will “save lives” and will be a “life-changing product” for many people. He’s also shared user-generated videos showing Tesla owners using FSD without their hands on the wheel.
However, in owners manuals, Tesla lists many conditions in which FSD Supervised may not be reliable, and warns users to keep their hands on the steering wheel at all times, and be ready to take over steering or braking.
Among the subset of survey respondents actively looking to buy a fully electric vehicle, only 20% said they were more likely to buy a Tesla because of FSD, while 33% said they were less likely. Evan Roth Smith, Slingshot’s head of research, said a lack of clarity and honesty in the company’s marketing could be a factor.
Most consumers polled by the firm want clear and strong regulations in the U.S. governing autonomous vehicles, whether they’re fully or partially automated.
“There is strong support for holding AV manufacturers responsible for accidents and requiring stricter regulatory and advertising guardrails around features such as FSD,” the Slingshot report said.
Smith said the data shows that beyond its FSD woes, Tesla has “the worst reputation of any EV maker in the U.S.”
“The drop in the company’s brand reputation this year is remarkable,” he said, adding that recent product liability lawsuits and verdicts may be playing a role.
In early August, a jury found Tesla partially liable for a fatal crash where the driver was relying on its autopilot systems. Tesla, which plans to appeal the decision, must pay around $243 million in damages to victims and a survivor.
In the past two months, the number of consumers who view Tesla cars as unsafe has increased to 36% from 34%, the Slingshot report found, while those viewing Tesla as very safe fell to 13% from 17%.
Honda, Toyota and Chevrolet were seen as safest among the greatest number of respondents.
Tesla didn’t respond to a request for comment. Slingshot said it sent the survey results to the company but also didn’t hear back from the automaker.
Tesla may find that owners in other markets embrace its brand, and FSD, with greater enthusiasm. The company just started offering FSD Supervised in Australia this week.
Read Slingshot’s full Electric Vehicle Intelligence Report for August 2025 here.
WATCH: Wedbush’s Ives says 80% of Musk lawsuit against Apple, OpenAI is ‘noise’
A Dell Technologies sign is seen in Round Rock, Texas, on June 2, 2023.
Brandon Bell | Getty Images
Despite beating on its top and bottom lines, shares of Dell Technologies fell more than 5% Thursday in extended trading after giving third-quarter earnings per share guidance that below Wall Street’s expectations.
Here’s how the systems integrator did versus LSEG consensus estimates:
- EPS: $2.32, adjusted vs. $2.30 estimated
- Revenue: $29.78 billion vs. $29.17 billion estimated
Dell raised its full year outlook for revenue to be $107 billion at its midpoint and diluted earnings per share to $9.55 at the midpoint, topping Wall Street estimates of $104.6 billion and $9.38 per share.
However, Dell’s guidance for third-quarter earnings per share of $2.45 came in short versus LSEG’s mark of $2.55, despite Dell’s guide for $27 billion in third-quarter revenue topping estimates of $26.1 billion.
Dell said that part of the reason its profit forecast is concentrated in the fourth quarter is due to seasonality, particularly in its storage business.
For the second quarter, overall revenue rose 19% on an annual basis. That was driven by the company’s Servers and Networking revenue, including AI servers, which came in at $12.9 billion, which was up 69% on an annual basis.
Dell is one of Nvidia’s key customers. Dell buys chips from the AI leader and builds computers around them, which it sells to end-users such as CoreWeave, a cloud service. Dell said it shipped $10 billion in AI servers in its past two quarters.
Dell said that it now plans to ship $20 billion of artificial intelligence servers in its fiscal 2026, double what it sold last year.
However, the company’s storage revenue declined 3% to $3.86 billion and missed a StreetAccount estimate of $4.1 billion in sales.
Revenue in the company’s client solutions group, which includes PC sales to enterprises, rose 1% on an annual basis to $12.5 billion. While it used to be Dell’s largest business group, in recent quarters it has grown much slowly than the company’s data center business.
Dell said it spent $1.3 billion on share repurchases and dividends during the quarter.
WATCH: Nvidia’s data center opportunity is still enormous and it’s early, says Bernstein’s Stacy Rasgon
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment11 months agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024