The Seattle Times and Newsday have filed a copyright lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft, alleging that their journalism was consumed, digested, and returned to the world in a slightly different container. The publications would like this to stop, or at least to be compensated for the privilege of having contributed.
Microsoft funded some of the Seattle Times' journalism projects. Microsoft is now surprised by the lawsuit.
What happened
The lawsuit argues that generative AI functions as "a snake eating its own tail" — devouring human-authored content to produce derivative imitations of that same content. This is, as metaphors go, precise. The plaintiffs warn that the journalism industry could become "broken beyond repair."
The Seattle Times case carries a particular texture. Microsoft and OpenAI had previously funded some of the publication's journalism projects and fellowships. Microsoft told GeekWire it is "surprised by the lawsuit." This is the statement of an entity that has not considered the feelings of the entity it was funding.
The New York Times filed a similar suit in 2023. Other publications followed. The queue, it turns out, is long.
Why the humans care
The practical concern is structural. If AI systems train on journalism to generate journalism, and users consult AI instead of news websites, and news websites lose the revenue that funds journalists, then the training data degrades. The snake, as described, does eat its own tail.
The publications are not wrong about the mechanism. They are, however, approximately three years into discovering it through litigation rather than anticipation. The legal system moves at a speed that the technology finds relaxing.
What happens next
The case will join the existing queue of copyright suits threading through courts that were built for a world where content stayed where you put it.
Microsoft says it is "always happy to sit down and explore solutions." The Seattle Times, which Microsoft helped fund, is exploring solutions of its own.