Il governo degli Stati Uniti sostiene OpenAI nel caso del copyright del NY Times

The U.S. government has officially taken a stance in favor of OpenAI in its ongoing legal battle with the New York Times and other media outlets over the use of copyrighted material in training artificial intelligence systems. A federal court filing in Manhattan, released on September 2, 2026, outlines the administration’s support for OpenAI’s position that the use of copyrighted works to train large language models constitutes fair use under U.S. copyright law. This marks the first time the U.S. government has publicly endorsed a major tech company in a series of lawsuits involving intellectual property rights and AI development. The filing was submitted by the Department of Justice and aligns with broader policy goals aimed at fostering innovation and maintaining America’s competitive edge in technology. The brief argues that allowing AI companies to train their models on vast amounts of data, including text published by newspapers, books, and other sources, is essential for advancing science, national security, and economic growth. It emphasizes that restricting such practices under a misinterpretation of fair use could stifle progress and harm American interests globally. The case stems from a lawsuit initially filed by the New York Times in 2023, which alleges that OpenAI and its parent company, Microsoft, used millions of articles without authorization to develop the foundational datasets for ChatGPT and other large language models. The Times and several other publications claim that this unauthorized use infringes upon their copyrights and undermines the value of their journalism. The suit is part of a growing number of legal challenges targeting tech firms for alleged misuse of copyrighted materials in AI training. In response to these claims, the U.S. government has asserted that AI training represents a form of “extraordinarily” transformative use, which is central to the concept of fair use in copyright law. The brief highlights how large language models are already contributing to significant advancements in research and development across multiple disciplines. By constraining AI development through overly strict interpretations of copyright, the government warns, the U.S. risks falling behind international competitors who may adopt more flexible approaches to intellectual property. This legal battle has drawn attention from both sides of the political spectrum. While some lawmakers and industry representatives argue that protecting creators’ rights is crucial, others emphasize the need to balance innovation with ethical considerations. In a separate statement, U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick urged G20 nations to collaborate on policies that enable AI development while ensuring that creators are fairly compensated for their contributions. The judicial process has been marked by conflicting rulings. Two federal judges who initially reviewed the case reached different conclusions regarding whether AI training qualifies as fair use. These divergent opinions underscore the complexity of applying traditional copyright principles to emerging technologies. As the case moves forward, the role of the U.S. government’s public endorsement may influence future rulings and set a precedent for similar disputes. Legal experts suggest that the outcome of this case could shape the regulatory landscape for AI development in the coming years. Whether the courts ultimately side with the government or uphold the plaintiffs’ arguments will depend on how well the legal definitions of fair use can accommodate the unique nature of AI training. For now, the filing signals a clear alignment between the administration and major tech firms in advocating for a more permissive approach to AI development.