# US Government Backs OpenAI in Copyright Dispute Justice Department argues AI training falls under 'fair use' doctrine. - **Source:** [Wired](https://www.wired.com) - **Published:** 2026-09-02 - **Topic:** [Business](https://brifing.si/c/business) - **Original article:** - **On Brifing:** https://brifing.si/s/1ec61c8d-9d59-4979-85fe-af5b8bb4c0de ## Case Background The New York Times sued OpenAI and Microsoft in 2023, alleging copyright infringement for training AI tools on its articles without permission. In a significant development, the US government filed a letter supporting OpenAI's position, arguing its actions were legally permissible. The government emphasized that AI training should be considered under 'fair use' provisions in copyright law. ## Government's Legal Arguments The Justice Department contended that AI training is 'highly transformative,' fundamentally altering its inputs. The letter stated the Times' definition of fair use conflicts with current copyright law. It also noted OpenAI's language models don't directly compete with the newspaper's articles - a key factor in fair use determinations under US legal precedent. ## Implications for AI Industry The government warned restricting AI training would stifle innovation and harm US competitiveness. Maintaining global AI leadership was framed as a national priority. This position could influence similar cases involving other publishers and creators, setting important precedents for the emerging legal landscape around generative AI technologies. ## Legal Process and Reactions Intellectual property attorney Evan Brown noted courts aren't obligated to consider such letters, but judges typically give Justice Department submissions substantial weight. Pamela Samuelson of Berkeley Law called it a 'significant development' consistent with recent AI copyright rulings. The intervention highlights growing government engagement with AI policy challenges. ## New York Times' Response Times spokesperson Graham James accused the government of siding with 'trillion-dollar AI companies at creators' expense.' The newspaper maintains AI firms should compensate content creators as required by copyright law. This stance reflects media industry concerns about AI systems potentially undermining traditional publishing business models. ## Authors Guild Criticism Authors Guild CEO Mary Rasenberger expressed 'extreme disappointment,' calling the letter 'filled with faulty arguments and fundamental misunderstandings.' The nonprofit, which sued OpenAI in 2023, represents writers concerned about uncompensated use of their works in AI training datasets. Their opposition underscores creator community anxieties. ## Related Cases and Precedents In Meta's case, judges noted plaintiffs failed to prove harm from AI training, though left door open for future claims. Anthropic was ordered to pay $1.5 billion - the largest copyright settlement in US history - for using pirated book copies, though the court affirmed AI training itself constituted fair use. These mixed rulings create legal uncertainty. ## Broader Industry Impact New lawsuits from Sony and Warner Music against Anthropic demonstrate expanding legal battles across creative industries. As AI companies defend practices as fair use, these cases will shape future copyright frameworks. The outcomes could determine whether AI development continues relying on existing content or requires new licensing paradigms. ## Sources covering this story - https://www.wired.com/story/trump-administration-sides-with-ai-giants-new-york-times-lawsuit/ — --- _Summary written by Brifing from the original reporting. Copyright in the original article belongs to its publisher; read the full piece at the link above._