Digital media publisher Ziff Davis has taken legal action against OpenAI, accusing the AI company of using its copyrighted publications without permission to train ChatGPT’s underlying model. The lawsuit highlights ongoing copyright disputes between content creators and AI developers over the use of protected materials for training generative AI systems.
Digital media publisher Ziff Davis has filed a lawsuit against OpenAI in a federal court in Delaware, accusing the artificial intelligence company of improperly using its copyrighted publications to train the AI model behind ChatGPT. The lawsuit, filed on Thursday, claims that OpenAI “intentionally and relentlessly” exploited the company’s content without permission.
Ziff Davis, whose portfolio includes well-known tech news outlets such as ZDNet, PCMag, CNET, IGN, as well as the advice website Lifehacker, alleges that OpenAI has acted quickly to develop its AI systems with little regard for the legal rights of content creators. According to the complaint, OpenAI appears to operate on the assumption that courts may not be able to effectively address the concerns of content owners before irreversible use takes place.
This legal action is part of a broader wave of copyright disputes involving news publishers, authors, and visual artists who have raised objections against OpenAI and other technology companies. These cases centre on allegations that generative AI systems have been trained using thousands of copyrighted works without obtaining appropriate permissions.
Other major news organisations that have initiated similar lawsuits against AI companies include the New York Times and Dow Jones. Meanwhile, OpenAI and other technology firms such as Google and Meta Platforms maintain that the use of copyrighted material by AI systems falls under fair use. They argue that their AI models study existing content to learn how to generate new and transformative material rather than merely copying it.
Responding to the lawsuit, an OpenAI spokesperson told ETLegalWorld.com, “Our AI models empower innovation, and are trained on publicly available data and grounded in fair use.” Meanwhile, a Ziff Davis representative declined to comment on the details of the legal proceedings.
Source: Noah Wire Services
- https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/25915739-ziff-davis-inc-v-openai-inc-complaint/ – This document supports the claim that Ziff Davis, Inc. has filed a lawsuit against OpenAI, Inc. for copyright infringement, detailing the allegations against OpenAI.
- https://www.law360.com/delaware/articles/2330174/pcmag-mashable-publisher-latest-to-sue-openai-over-ip – This article corroborates that Ziff Davis wrote to OpenAI about copyright infringement before the lawsuit and highlights OpenAI’s legal challenges.
- https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/MICROSOFT-CORPORATION-4835/news/Publisher-Ziff-Davis-sues-OpenAI-for-copyright-infringement-49712705/ – This report confirms Ziff Davis’ lawsuit against OpenAI in Delaware federal court and details the accusations of exploiting copyrighted content without permission.
- https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/MICROSOFT-CORPORATION-4835/news/Publisher-Ziff-Davis-sues-OpenAI-for-copyright-infringement-49712705/ – It also supports the broader context of copyright disputes involving news publishers and technology firms like OpenAI, Google, and Meta Platforms.
- https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/25915739-ziff-davis-inc-v-openai-inc-complaint/ – The complaint outlines how Ziff Davis sees OpenAI’s actions as disregarding legal rights and assuming courts won’t address concerns before significant use occurs.
- https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/MICROSOFT-CORPORATION-4835/news/Publisher-Ziff-Davis-sues-OpenAI-for-copyright-infringement-49712705/ – This source mentions other news organisations like the New York Times and Dow Jones that have initiated similar lawsuits against AI companies.
- https://news.google.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?oc=5&hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US:en – Please view link – unable to able to access data
Noah Fact Check Pro
The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first
emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed
below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may
warrant further investigation.
Freshness check
Score:
9
Notes:
The lawsuit was filed recently, as indicated by the text stating it occurred on Thursday, making the information fresh and relevant.
Quotes check
Score:
8
Notes:
The quote from an OpenAI spokesperson appears original to the context, as it directly responds to the lawsuit. However, without further verification, its original source cannot be confirmed.
Source reliability
Score:
8
Notes:
The narrative originates from a reputable news aggregation service, but the specific publication or journalist is not identified. This reduces certainty about the reliability.
Plausability check
Score:
9
Notes:
The claims are plausible given the ongoing wave of copyright disputes involving AI companies. Similar actions have been taken by other prominent news organizations like the New York Times and Dow Jones.
Overall assessment
Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): PASS
Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): HIGH
Summary:
The narrative presents recent and plausible information regarding a lawsuit involving copyright disputes over AI model training. The lack of specific source attribution reduces confidence slightly, but overall, the content appears credible.
