OpenAI appeals data preservation order in NYT copyright case
Last month, a court said OpenAI had to preserve and segregate all output log data after the Times asked for the data to be preserved.
'We will fight any demand that compromises our users' privacy; this is a core principle,' OpenAI CEO Sam Altman said in a post on X on Thursday.
OpenAI to open office in Seoul amid growing demand for ChatGPT
'We think this (The Times demand) was an inappropriate request that sets a bad precedent.'
U.S. District Judge Sidney Stein was asked to vacate the May data preservation order on June 3, a court filing showed.
The New York Times did not immediately respond to a request for comment outside regular business hours.
The newspaper sued OpenAI and Microsoft in 2023, accusing them of using millions of its articles without permission to train the large language model behind its popular chatbot.
Stein said in an April court opinion that the Times had made a case that OpenAI and Microsoft were responsible for inducing users to infringe its copyrights.
The opinion explained an earlier order that rejected parts of an OpenAI and Microsoft motion to dismiss, saying that the Times' 'numerous' and 'widely publicized' examples of ChatGPT producing material from its articles justified allowing the claims to continue.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Recorder
22 minutes ago
- Business Recorder
OpenAI, Oracle deepen AI data center push with 4.5 gigawatt Stargate expansion
OpenAI and Oracle will develop another 4.5 gigawatts of data center capacity, expanding a tie-up that has promised hundreds of billions of dollars in infrastructure investment to keep the U.S. ahead in the global artificial intelligence race. The ChatGPT maker did not disclose the locations or funding details for the new facilities in Tuesday's announcement. The move builds on the Stargate initiative, an up to $500 billion and 10 gigawatt project that also includes Japanese technology investor SoftBank Group and is setting up its first AI data center in Abilene, Texas. OpenAI, as well as its backer Microsoft, are among the technology companies pouring billions of dollars on data centers to power generative AI services such as ChatGPT and Copilot that require huge amounts of computing power. The growing use of AI in sensitive sectors such as defense, as well as China's push to catch up, has made the nascent technology a top priority for U.S. President Donald Trump, who unveiled Stargate at the White House in January. Oracle to invest $3 billion in AI, cloud expansion in Germany, Netherlands The new data centers will bring Stargate's total capacity under development to more than 5 gigawatts, which will run on over 2 million chips, OpenAI said in a blog post, adding that the tie-up now expects to exceed its initial commitment. Oracle and SoftBank did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The White House also did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Analysts have raised doubts about the venture's ability to secure the funding, including $100 billion for immediate deployment. In January, xAI owner Elon Musk, dismissed the group, saying 'they don't actually have the money.' OpenAI and SoftBank will each commit $19 billion to fund Stargate, reports said in January. The Wall Street Journal reported on Monday the two companies have been at odds with each other and Stargate is now setting a more modest goal of building a small data center at end-2025, likely in Ohio.
Express Tribune
17 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Microsoft builds digital twin of Notre-Dame
Microsoft is teaming up with the French government to create a digital replica of Paris' Notre-Dame Cathedral, France's most visited monument, the US tech company's president, Brad Smith, said on Monday. As per Reuters, the 862-year-old Gothic masterpiece was reopened last December after a five-year restoration following a devastating fire in 2019 that destroyed its spire and roof. A digital replica will serve as a record of the building's architectural details, Microsoft said. It will also provide a virtual experience for visitors and those unable to visit. The cathedral became a symbol of Paris and France after Victor Hugo used it as a setting for his 1831 novel The Hunchback of Notre-Dame. Quasimodo, the main character, has been portrayed in Hollywood films, an animated Disney adaptation and in musicals. Last year, Microsoft worked with Iconem, a French company that specialises in digitalisation of heritage sites, on a digital replica of St Peter's Basilica in Vatican City. "One of the things we learned from the work at St Peter's is how a digital twin can help support the ongoing maintenance of a building. Because you capture a digital record of every centimetre and what is there and what it's supposed to look like," Smith told Reuters. "The ability to create a digital twin right now I think will provide an enormously valuable digital record that I believe people are going to be using 100 years from now," he said. Since 2019, Microsoft has digitally preserved heritage sites and events including Ancient Olympia in Greece, Mont Saint-Michel in France and the 80th Anniversary of the Allied Beach Landings in Normandy. The Notre-Dame project marks its latest step in blending technology with cultural memory.
Express Tribune
17 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Lawless digital dreams
The writer is a lawyer who deals with legal corporate and commercial matters. He tweets @H_Rohila What good is a digital revolution if the law never arrives? Pakistan speaks with urgency about building a technology-driven economy. It sets ambitious export targets, hosts tech summits, and courts foreign investment. Yet behind this narrative lies a stark and uncomfortable truth: the legal and institutional infrastructure needed to sustain digital growth is fragmented, outdated, or in some cases, absent entirely. That absence is not abstract. It has measurable consequences. The technology sector has shown promise. IT exports have crossed three billion dollars in just ten months. The government hopes to triple that figure within five years. Startups are emerging with confidence. Venture capital interest, though cautious, is returning. Global companies are evaluating opportunities. On paper, it all looks like momentum. But that momentum is fragile. Multinationals are not just hesitating. They are leaving. Microsoft has quietly relocated its regional operations to jurisdictions with clearer regulatory regimes. Uber has exited. Careem is discontinuing its ride hailing services. These decisions are not anecdotal. They reflect systemic discomfort with Pakistan's regulatory climate: unclear licensing frameworks, inconsistent policy enforcement, foreign exchange restrictions, and delays that outlast business cycles. Regulatory opacity has become an operational risk. When the system does work, it feels like a favour rather than a norm. The entry of Starlink into Pakistan is being cited as a breakthrough. But even that required direct intervention by the Prime Minister's Office. The project was approved through cooperation between PTA, SECP and SUPARCO. These permissions were granted under the National Satellite Policy 2023 and the Space Activities Rules 2024. It worked. But the lesson here is not just about success. It is about how much political capital is needed to make the system function. Personal data protection remains another glaring void. After years of public consultation and multiple bill drafts, Pakistan still lacks a comprehensive data protection law. As a result, citizens' data is collected, shared, and sometimes misused without recourse. Businesses operate in a grey zone. There are no statutory rights, no oversight authority, and no clear obligations. Contrast this with the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). That law grants enforceable rights to data subjects, creates independent data protection authorities, and imposes steep penalties for noncompliance. Even India, often a regulatory peer, enacted the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, marking a clear move toward rights based governance of data. Pakistan, by comparison, has made little progress. The delay is no longer technical or procedural. It is political. Legal inertia also undermines the constitutionally mandated principle of lawful executive discretion. The Supreme Court has held that even in matters of national security, executive action must be grounded in valid legal authority. Surveillance, data collection and algorithmic profiling in Pakistan occur without this foundation. That alone should worry us. Artificial Intelligence is no longer theoretical. Banks are using it to score credit. Employers rely on it for screening applicants. Government agencies experiment with predictive surveillance. And yet, there is no regulatory framework governing AI use. No law demands algorithmic transparency. No tribunal hears complaints about machine made decisions. No requirement exists for public agencies to explain how these tools are used or why. This legal silence has human consequences. A qualified applicant may be rejected due to a flawed algorithm. A facial recognition tool may misidentify a protester. A credit scoring system may entrench bias. Without legislative guardrails, these systems operate without scrutiny or remedy. The global contrast is stark. The EU AI Act, passed in 2024, categorises AI systems based on risk and imposes obligations accordingly. In the United States, federal agencies have issued AI risk management frameworks that prioritise civil liberties. Pakistan, meanwhile, has not even initiated a public consultation process. The legal vacuum is complete. Then there is intellectual property. It is an area rapidly destabilised by generative AI. Tools can now produce music, images, film scripts and software code. But Pakistan's Copyright Ordinance, 1962 offers no guidance on authorship, originality or infringement in AI generated content. The law predates digital technology. It is silent on questions now central to creative economies. Compare this with the position in the United States, where the Copyright Office has clarified that purely AI generated works are not protectable unless there is substantial human input. That principle may evolve, but at least there is one. In Pakistan, the absence of legislative debate leaves creators, platforms and investors in legal limbo. Reform is overdue. The Copyright Board, empowered under the Ordinance, must be reconstituted with expertise in digital innovation. The legislature must define "authorship" and "originality" in light of evolving technologies. Without it, innovation will migrate elsewhere. Even the judiciary, which should lead in defending constitutional rights and settling digital disputes, remains underprepared. Some high courts experimented with video link hearings during Covid-19. But most courts still rely on paper files, face logistical backlogs, and operate without digital case management systems. This is not just a matter of convenience. It affects access to justice. Legal challenges involving cryptocurrency fraud, data privacy breaches or AI based discrimination require fast, informed adjudication. Judges need training. Courts need infrastructure. And citizens need a system that understands the complexity of digital disputes. Other jurisdictions have shown what is possible. Singapore's judiciary is fully digitised. Kenya and Romania have introduced hybrid models with remote proceedings and online document submission. These are not tech utopias. Just examples of what political will can achieve. What, then, must be done? Parliament must enact a strong and enforceable data protection law, overseen by an independent data authority. It must initiate AI legislation that mandates transparency, accountability and redress. The Copyright Ordinance must be modernised to reflect 21st century realities. Courts must be digitised as part of a coordinated national justice reform programme. Most importantly, digital governance must be coherent. It cannot be cobbled together through ministerial memos or ad hoc taskforces. The federal cabinet, judiciary, regulators and provincial assemblies must align on a national legal roadmap.
