This is a OpenAI news story, published by Bloomberg Law, that relates primarily to Times news.
For more OpenAI news, you can click here:
more OpenAI newsFor more Ai policy and regulations news, you can click here:
more Ai policy and regulations newsFor more news from Bloomberg Law, you can click here:
more news from Bloomberg LawOtherweb, Inc is a public benefit corporation, dedicated to improving the quality of news people consume. We are non-partisan, junk-free, and ad-free. We use artificial intelligence (AI) to remove junk from your news feed, and allow you to select the best tech news, business news, entertainment news, and much more. If you like this article about Ai policy and regulations, you might also like this article about
copyright lawsuits. We are dedicated to bringing you the highest-quality news, junk-free and ad-free, about your favorite topics. Please come every day to read the latest copyright disputes news, other copyright cases news, news about Ai policy and regulations, and other high-quality news about any topic that interests you. We are working hard to create the best news aggregator on the web, and to put you in control of your news feed - whether you choose to read the latest news through our website, our news app, or our daily newsletter - all free!
private newsgathering processesBloomberg Law
•
82% Informative
The New York Times sued OpenAI and Microsoft over millions of articles allegedly used to train ChatGPT.
The AI company asked a judge to compel the Times to produce reporters’ notes, interview memos, and other materials for each of the roughly 10 million contested articles the publication alleges were illegally plugged into the company’s AI models.
OpenAI said it needs the material to suss out the copyrightability of the articles.
The Times argued the request bears no relevance to the case: the expressive nature of a work doesn’t need outside materials but is determined by reference to the work itself.
It also invades reporters’ privilege, which protects the identities of journalists’ sources regardless of whether those identities are confidential.
VR Score
84
Informative language
83
Neutral language
55
Article tone
formal
Language
English
Language complexity
65
Offensive language
not offensive
Hate speech
not hateful
Attention-grabbing headline
not detected
Known propaganda techniques
not detected
Time-value
short-lived
External references
6
Source diversity
6
Affiliate links
no affiliate links