House Democrats challenge DOJ position in OpenAI copyright case

The lawmakers asked the court to reject the Justice Department’s arguments and uphold legal protections they say ensure fair compensation.[1] They contend that the Copyright Act does not let private companies use copyrighted material without permission on national-security grounds, and that national security is not among the statute’s fair-use factors.[1] In their view, accepting the DOJ position would add an exception Congress did not enact.[1] They also say fair-use analysis should account for the circumstances of a particular use, including the amount copied and its effect on the original work’s market.[1]

The Justice Department intervened on September 1 to support AI companies, arguing that limits on using copyrighted texts would threaten American AI development and national security.[1] It also argued that using Times articles and other written works transformed them into new material permitted by copyright law.[2] The DOJ said AI development was critical to national security and outweighed potential harms.[2] The lawmakers called that position a “bulldozer” that could eliminate copyright protection for AI training across works and circumstances, and said adopting it would be financially devastating to the copyright community and the nation.[2]

The case involves allegations that OpenAI and Microsoft used New York Times journalism without permission to develop competing AI products.[1] The Times sued the companies in late 2023 over their use of its works to develop ChatGPT and related AI systems.[2] Other news publishers also brought cases, which were consolidated in the Southern District of New York.[2] The tech companies argue that their actions are allowed under fair-use protections in copyright law.[2] The lawmakers say Times articles contain creative structure, framing and analysis that copyright is intended to protect.[2]

Judge Sidney H. Stein was considering summary-judgment motions, and Friday was the deadline for outside parties to file amicus briefs.[2] The Judiciary Democrats’ filing was the only amicus brief in the case so far from current lawmakers.[2] Nadler’s office dated its announcement October 30, 2026.[1] The Justice Department declined to comment beyond its court filing.[2] The lawmakers also said there had been no input from federal bodies with expertise in the subject.[3]