The Center for Investigative Reporting Inc. v. OpenAI Court Filing, retrieved on June 27, 2024, is part of HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series. You can jump to any part in this filing here. This part is 9 of 18. DEFENDANTS’ COLLABORATION IN INFRINGING PLAINTIFF’S COPYRIGHT, UNLAWFULLY REMOVING COPYRIGHT MANAGEMENT INFORMATION, AND UNLAWFULLY DISTRIBUTING PLAINTIFF’S WORKS WITH COPYRIGHT MANAGEMENT INFORMATION REMOVED 101. Based on the publicly available information described above, including the admission from Microsoft’s CEO that “we have the data, we have everything,” Defendant Microsoft has created, without Plaintiff’s permission, its own copies of Plaintiff’s copyright protected works of journalism, including but not limited to the Registered Works. 102. Based on the publicly available information described above, including information showing that Defendant Microsoft created and hosted the data centers used to develop ChatGPT and information regarding Microsoft’s own Copilot, Defendant Microsoft intentionally removed author, title, copyright notice, and terms of use information from Plaintiff’s copyrighted works in creating ChatGPT and Copilot training sets. 103. Based on publicly available information regarding the relationship between Defendant Microsoft and the OpenAI Defendants, and Defendant Microsoft’s provision of database and computing resources to the OpenAI Defendants, Defendant Microsoft has shared copies of Plaintiff’s works from which author, title, copyright notice, and terms of use information had been removed, with the OpenAI Defendants as part of Defendants’ efforts to develop ChatGPT and Copilot. 104. Based on publicly available information regarding the working relationship between Defendant Microsoft and the OpenAI Defendants, including the creation of training sets by the OpenAI Defendants such as WebText and WebText2, the OpenAI Defendants have shared copies of Plaintiff’s works from which author, title, copyright notice, and terms of use information had been removed, with Defendant Microsoft as part of Defendants’ efforts to develop ChatGPT and Copilot. Continue Reading Here. About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings.
This court case retrieved on June 27, 2024, motherjones.com is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. The Center for Investigative Reporting Inc. v. OpenAI Court Filing, retrieved on June 27, 2024, is part of HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series. You can jump to any part in this filing here. This part is 9 of 18. The Center for Investigative Reporting Inc. v. OpenAI Court Filing, retrieved on June 27, 2024, is part of HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series . You can jump to any part in this filing here . This part is 9 of 18. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here DEFENDANTS’ COLLABORATION IN INFRINGING PLAINTIFF’S COPYRIGHT, UNLAWFULLY REMOVING COPYRIGHT MANAGEMENT INFORMATION, AND UNLAWFULLY DISTRIBUTING PLAINTIFF’S WORKS WITH COPYRIGHT MANAGEMENT INFORMATION REMOVED 101. Based on the publicly available information described above, including the admission from Microsoft’s CEO that “we have the data, we have everything,” Defendant Microsoft has created, without Plaintiff’s permission, its own copies of Plaintiff’s copyright protected works of journalism, including but not limited to the Registered Works. 102. Based on the publicly available information described above, including information showing that Defendant Microsoft created and hosted the data centers used to develop ChatGPT and information regarding Microsoft’s own Copilot, Defendant Microsoft intentionally removed author, title, copyright notice, and terms of use information from Plaintiff’s copyrighted works in creating ChatGPT and Copilot training sets. 103. Based on publicly available information regarding the relationship between Defendant Microsoft and the OpenAI Defendants, and Defendant Microsoft’s provision of database and computing resources to the OpenAI Defendants, Defendant Microsoft has shared copies of Plaintiff’s works from which author, title, copyright notice, and terms of use information had been removed, with the OpenAI Defendants as part of Defendants’ efforts to develop ChatGPT and Copilot. 104. Based on publicly available information regarding the working relationship between Defendant Microsoft and the OpenAI Defendants, including the creation of training sets by the OpenAI Defendants such as WebText and WebText2, the OpenAI Defendants have shared copies of Plaintiff’s works from which author, title, copyright notice, and terms of use information had been removed, with Defendant Microsoft as part of Defendants’ efforts to develop ChatGPT and Copilot. Continue Reading Here. Continue Reading Here . Here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case retrieved on June 27, 2024, motherjones.com is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case retrieved on June 27, 2024, motherjones.com is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. motherjones.com

OpenAI's Alleged Role in Copyright Infringement and Removal of Copyright Management Information

About Author

Comments

TOPICS

THIS ARTICLE WAS FEATURED IN

Related Stories

DOE v. Github: Code Stored on GitHub Ultimately Belong to Their Authors

A Guide on How to Make Your AI Fool-Proof

Why Every AI Product Needs an Impact Assessment Before Deployment

The HackerNoon Newsletter: Can ChatGPT Outperform the Market? Week 16 (11/17/2025)

ISO 24027 Explained: A Practical Guide to Bias-Free, Ethical, and Compliant AI Systems

⚠️Calling All Brains! ⚠️GenAI Misconceptions!

DOE v. Github: Code Stored on GitHub Ultimately Belong to Their Authors

A Guide on How to Make Your AI Fool-Proof

Why Every AI Product Needs an Impact Assessment Before Deployment

The HackerNoon Newsletter: Can ChatGPT Outperform the Market? Week 16 (11/17/2025)

ISO 24027 Explained: A Practical Guide to Bias-Free, Ethical, and Compliant AI Systems

⚠️Calling All Brains! ⚠️GenAI Misconceptions!

Light-Mode

Classic

Newspaper

Minty

Dark-Mode

Neon Noir

Minty

HN StartUps