Seattle Times and Newsday sue OpenAI and Microsoft over news use

Introduction

The legal conflict between news publishers and artificial intelligence companies is widening. On September 5, 2026, The Seattle Times and Newsday sued OpenAI and Microsoft, becoming the latest news organizations to challenge how journalism is used in the development of AI products. The dispute follows The New York Times’ 2023 lawsuit against the same companies and a broader wave of publisher actions.

Key points

• The publishers are challenging the use of journalism in AI products. The complaint argues that OpenAI and Microsoft used news content in connection with products such as ChatGPT and Copilot, although the material does not establish the precise scope of the alleged use or the damages being sought.
• The dispute concerns more than model training. The publishers are also concerned that AI systems can return summaries, copies, or derivative versions of reporting directly to users. That could reduce traffic, subscriptions, and other forms of support for the organizations that produce original journalism.
• The complaint frames a potential feedback loop. The plaintiffs argue that generative AI relies on human-authored reporting while potentially weakening the newsrooms that create it. In their view, the long-term result could be a media ecosystem with fewer reliable sources for both readers and future AI systems.
• Existing cooperation makes the case unusual. Microsoft and OpenAI have funded some Seattle Times journalism projects and fellowships. That history does not resolve the copyright question, but it highlights the complicated line between partnership, sponsorship, and permission to use editorial content.
• Microsoft says it is willing to talk. A Microsoft spokesperson told GeekWire that the company was surprised by the lawsuit but was always willing to sit down and explore solutions. The supplied material does not provide a ruling, a settlement, or a specific financial claim.

Why it matters

The case could help shape the next phase of negotiations between publishers and AI companies. Issues likely to remain central include whether training or displaying news requires permission, how content sources should be disclosed, and whether AI-generated answers compete with the original articles that supplied their information.

For publishers, the challenge is to pursue licensing revenue without becoming dependent on the same technology platforms that may redirect attention away from their sites. Existing funding and collaboration arrangements further complicate that task: financial support for journalism is not necessarily the same as a license to ingest or reproduce the underlying reporting.

For AI companies, the lawsuits increase pressure to develop clearer data-governance practices, attribution mechanisms, and commercial agreements with content owners. However, the allegations in this case remain allegations. Whether the companies infringed copyright, had permission to use particular material, or produced legally actionable outputs will have to be determined through legal proceedings and any later settlement.

The outcome may extend beyond these four organizations. It could influence how publishers value archives, how AI search products display answers, and whether the next generation of models is built on open collection, negotiated access, or a combination of both.

Source: TechCrunch AI