Seattle Times and Newsday join wave of lawsuits against OpenAI and Microsoft

Two more news organizations have sued OpenAI and Microsoft, alleging the companies used their journalistic content to train language models without a license. The complaint, filed in federal court, adds to a string of legal actions publishers have pursued against AI companies since late 2023.

Blunt language in the complaint

The filing does not mince words: the news industry risks becoming "broken beyond repair" with the arrival of generative AI. The models are described as a "snake eating its own tail" that could "destroy the very organizations" producing the content on which they train. "AI products such as ChatGPT and Copilot are presented as content creators, but in reality they are ravenous consumers, swallowing human-written content and feeding the world copies and derivative imitations of that same original content they consumed to achieve their commercial goals," the complaint states.

Context: The New York Times led the way

The New York Times filed a similar suit against OpenAI and Microsoft in 2023, alleging copyright infringement; other publishers have since joined the wave. The core argument repeats: large language models were built on billions of copyrighted texts, and the developing companies neither paid for the use nor sought permission.

The irony: Microsoft funded the plaintiff

The Seattle Times case stands out because Microsoft and OpenAI previously helped fund some of the organization's journalism projects and fellowships. Such funding was meant to signal support for local journalism; now the plaintiff cites it as evidence the defendants recognized the content's value yet chose to use it without a licensing agreement.

Microsoft response: surprised, open to talks

A Microsoft spokesperson told GeekWire the company is "surprised by the lawsuit" but "always happy to sit down and explore solutions to this kind of dispute." The phrasing follows a familiar pattern: an implied denial of the claims paired with a declared willingness to negotiate, aimed at avoiding a court ruling that would set a binding precedent for the entire industry.

What comes next

The lawsuits are piling up, but no definitive ruling yet exists on the core question: whether training a model on copyrighted material constitutes fair use or copyright infringement. Until a supreme court decides, publishers are trying to build legal and economic pressure that will force AI companies to pay for the data, or at least reach licensing deals before the next generation of models hits the market.