UPDATE: The Orlando Sentinel and a coalition of news organizations are escalating their legal battle against OpenAI, demanding sanctions after allegations that the tech giant deleted crucial evidence in an ongoing copyright infringement lawsuit. In urgent court filings, attorneys revealed that OpenAI allegedly destroyed millions of conversations that were ordered to be preserved by two judges.
According to newly submitted documents, OpenAI has failed to comply with court orders to provide over 20 million logs of user conversations, with claims that more than 1 million logs were improperly substituted with other data. This raises significant concerns about the integrity of the evidence as the news outlets argue that their copyrighted material has been misappropriated by ChatGPT, resulting in misleading outputs to users.
Attorney Steve Lieberman emphasized the seriousness of the situation in a letter to the court, stating, “[A]fter this Court ordered OpenAI to produce 20 million logs over OpenAI’s vociferous and repeated objections, OpenAI substituted millions of conversations that it was ordered to produce with other conversations – seemingly because it had deleted millions of the selected logs.”
The January 5, 2024 court order from Federal Judge Sidney Stein reaffirmed the necessity of these logs, rejecting OpenAI’s claims that the judge’s earlier ruling was “clearly erroneous.” Stein stated that the balance between user privacy and the relevance of the documents was adequately addressed by Magistrate Judge Ona Wang.
This legal tussle is unfolding amid a complex lawsuit involving prominent media entities like The New York Times, alongside the Authors Guild and various esteemed authors. The organizations allege that OpenAI’s use of their copyrighted works has led to the dissemination of inaccurate information to ChatGPT users, undermining journalistic integrity.
The court has also highlighted concerns over OpenAI’s “hashing” practices, where the company altered identification numbers in user conversations, complicating the review process for the media’s legal teams. The plaintiffs argue that OpenAI’s extensive redactions have obscured vital details, including bylines and outlet names, severely hampering their ability to gather necessary evidence.
In response to these developments, the news organizations are pushing for a court order to compel OpenAI to justify why it should not be held in contempt. They are seeking an evidentiary hearing in the upcoming months, signaling a potentially prolonged legal confrontation.
As this case unfolds, the implications extend beyond just the parties involved. It raises critical questions about the accountability of AI companies in handling copyrighted material and the protection of journalistic integrity in the digital age.
OpenAI has yet to respond to requests for comment from the media, but a spokesperson previously remarked that the allegations are a misrepresentation of how their technology operates.
Stay tuned as this story develops; the ramifications of this legal battle could reshape the relationship between AI technology and the media landscape.
