Seattle Times and Newsday Allege OpenAI and Microsoft Used Paywalled Journalism Without Permission

The Seattle Times and Newsday sued OpenAI and Microsoft in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on September 4, 2026, alleging that the companies copied their journalism without authorization to train and operate commercial AI products. The complaint includes reporting that was available only behind the newspapers’ paywalls. The claims have not been decided by a court. 1

What the newspapers say OpenAI and Microsoft did

According to the lawsuit, OpenAI and Microsoft scraped the newspapers’ websites and incorporated their articles into datasets used to train and operate ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, and Bing’s AI features. The publishers contend that this use occurred without a license, consent, or compensation. 1

The paywall allegation is central to the dispute. The newspapers argue that the alleged copying was not limited to reporting freely accessible on the web, but extended to subscriber-only journalism. 1

The claimed impact of AI-generated answers

The publishers allege that the AI products can reproduce passages from their work or closely paraphrase their reporting. In their view, a user who receives the substance of an article through a chatbot or AI search feature may have less reason to visit the original publisher’s website. 1

That, the newspapers say, can reduce referral traffic, page views, advertising opportunities, and paid subscriptions. Their broader argument is that AI companies benefit from costly original reporting while weakening the audience revenue that supports the reporting itself. 1

Seattle Times President and CEO Alan Fisco said the organization spends millions of dollars each year producing its content and must defend it from use without consent or compensation. 1

How OpenAI and Microsoft responded

OpenAI said it trains models using publicly available data and has maintained that this activity is protected by fair use. 1

Microsoft did not offer a detailed legal defense in the reported initial response. It said it was open to discussing solutions with publishers. 1

Whether the copying alleged by the newspapers is legally protected fair use—or instead requires permission and payment—is a question for the courts. The companies’ defenses and the publishers’ claims remain unresolved.

The unusually broad remedies the lawsuit seeks

The newspapers seek damages and injunctive relief. They also request impoundment or destruction of allegedly infringing copies of their articles, datasets containing those works, and AI models that incorporate the material. 1

That request is notable because it reaches beyond removing source copies. If granted, it could affect datasets and trained systems alleged to embody the publishers’ journalism. Whether such a remedy is legally available or appropriate will be determined in litigation.

How the case fits the New York Times dispute

The Seattle Times and Newsday case follows The New York Times’ December 2023 lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft, which also challenges the alleged use of newspaper articles in AI development. The Times amended its complaint in June 2026. 4

In a separate development shortly before the Seattle Times and Newsday filing, the U.S. government submitted a brief supporting OpenAI’s position that AI training will generally qualify as fair use. That filing represents the government’s litigation position, not a ruling on the merits. 2

Why the case matters for journalism and generative AI

The lawsuit is part of a wider set of copyright disputes in which publishers, authors, artists, music-rights holders, and other creators have challenged how AI companies obtain and use copyrighted material. The core tension is straightforward: AI developers argue that training on large collections of data can be transformative fair use, while rights holders argue that unlicensed copying and outputs that substitute for their work require permission and compensation.

For local and regional publishers, the stakes extend beyond a licensing fee. The Seattle Times and Newsday argue that if AI answers replace visits to the original reporting, the economics of producing independent journalism could be harmed. The court has not yet determined whether the alleged conduct infringed the newspapers’ rights or whether the defendants’ fair-use defenses apply. 1