Trump’s DOJ Skewered By NYT For Backing OpenAI & “Trillion-Dollar AI Companies” In Media Heavyweights & Star-Studded Scribes Copyright Suit
The US Department of Justice has filed a court submission backing OpenAI in a major copyright lawsuit brought by The New York Times, several other newspapers and a group of prominent authors, prompting a sharp rebuke from the Times. The intervention matters because it signals the Trump administration's willingness to use federal legal weight to support AI companies' use of copyrighted material for training, potentially shaping how fair-use doctrine is interpreted in a case with wide implications for publishers, writers and the AI industry.
In its "statement of interest" filed late on Tuesday, the DOJ argued that training large language models on copyrighted texts should not be found to violate copyright law, saying the benefits of stronger US-based AI "far outweigh any competitive harm" and framing the issue as one of national security given competition from foreign rivals. The Times, whose case is nearly three years old and includes co-plaintiffs such as Florida and Arkansas newspapers, The Intercept, and authors including George R.R. Martin, John Grisham, Jonathan Franzen and Sarah Silverman, accused the administration of siding with "trillion-dollar AI companies" over creators, insisting AI firms should pay fairly for the content they use.
In short
- DOJ backs OpenAI against NYT and authors in copyright fight
- Times accuses administration of favouring AI firms over creators
- DOJ cites national security and AI competitiveness as justification
Steelman: both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
The DOJ’s position is that training AI on copyrighted works can advance US innovation and security, especially as the country competes with foreign AI developers. If training is treated as fair use, companies could build useful systems without negotiating licences for every text, while courts could still consider whether particular outputs unlawfully reproduce protected works.
The case against
Publishers and authors argue that AI companies should not be able to use their work for commercial training without permission or payment. Such use may divert value from creators and weaken the economic basis for producing journalism and literature; requiring licences could protect those interests while allowing AI development on negotiated terms.
Explained simply
Generative AI systems learn patterns from large collections of text, which can include books and newspaper articles. US copyright law sets rules for how creative work may be copied and used, but courts have not settled how those rules apply when material is used to train AI.
The New York Times and other publishers, alongside writers including George R.R. Martin and John Grisham, are suing OpenAI over its use of copyrighted material. OpenAI disputes the claims, and the case raises questions about whether AI training is a permitted use and whether publishers and authors should be paid.
The outcome could affect how AI companies build their systems and how writers and publishers protect or license their work. It may also influence how courts balance copyright protections with the development of AI in the United States.
AI Art Celebrity Culture Entertainment Government Politics Technology