US Government Backs OpenAI in Legal Battle Over AI Training on Copyrighted Works

The Trump administration has submitted a 20-page legal brief supporting OpenAI in an ongoing copyright infringement lawsuit brought by The New York Times. The filing argues in favor of the artificial intelligence firm’s unlicensed use of copyrighted material to train large language models, framing the practice as protected under fair use principles and essential to national interests.

What Happened

In the legal dispute pending before the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, The New York Times contends that OpenAI acted unlawfully by utilizing its copyrighted articles and materials without authorization to train models powering ChatGPT. In response, the Trump administration intervened by filing a 20-page brief defending OpenAI. The administration stated that the United States maintains a strong interest in developing a competitive artificial intelligence sector and must retain global leadership in AI, citing an executive order signed by President Donald Trump last year.

Key Highlights

• The Trump administration filed a 20-page brief backing OpenAI’s unlicensed use of copyrighted materials for AI training.
• The filing links AI model development directly to national competitiveness, referencing an executive order signed by President Trump.
• The administration cautioned that restricting model development through a misunderstanding of fair use doctrine could hinder creative progress, scientific innovation, and American economic prosperity.
• The legal dispute centers on whether utilizing published works to train models qualifies as legally protected transformative fair use.
• The brief is an intervention rather than a binding court decision, as jurisdiction rests with the federal district court.

Why This Matters

Large language models such as ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini rely on extensive collections of published works, including copyrighted books and articles introduced into training databases without explicit permission. Publishers argue this constitutes infringement, while AI developers contend the training process constitutes fair use. The government’s brief argues that constraining large language model development under a misunderstanding of fair use would impede scientific progress and economic mobility. Past legal disputes have largely leaned in favor of AI developers on training questions; for instance, while Judge William Alsup previously ordered Anthropic to pay a $1.5 billion settlement, the penalty stemmed from using pirated shadow libraries rather than the training process itself, which the judge likened to a human reading a book to learn.

What to Watch Next

The filed brief does not constitute a ruling, because the executive branch authors do not have judicial authority over the matter. The final decision rests with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, where proceedings will determine whether training artificial intelligence systems on copyrighted content meets the legal definition of transformative fair use.

Frequently Asked Questions

Did the court rule in favor of OpenAI?

No. The filing is an amicus-style legal brief submitted by the Trump administration, not a judicial ruling. The case remains under consideration in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

What is the core legal argument in the government’s brief?

The brief argues that training AI models on copyrighted material is protected under the fair use doctrine as transformative use, warning that restricting this development would harm American economic mobility, innovation, and global AI leadership.

Why did The New York Times sue OpenAI?

The New York Times filed the lawsuit alleging that OpenAI unlawfully fed its copyrighted articles and media into massive databases to train artificial intelligence models without licensing or permission.

Source: TechCrunch and U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York court records.