OpenAI pushes back as The New York Times seeks access to millions of ChatGPT logs

OpenAI

OpenAI is gearing up for a crucial battle in its ongoing legal fight with The New York Times (NYT), which wants to dig through a massive trove of ChatGPT logs to look for potential copyright violations. The two sides have jointly asked the court to hold a confidential settlement conference on August 7 — but this isn’t about ending the case. Instead, it’s meant to settle a major dispute over how much access the NYT should get to ChatGPT’s internal records.

According to a report from Ars Technica, this could be OpenAI’s last big attempt to stop the NYT from sifting through what it calls an “extraordinarily broad” range of user data. The company argues that allowing such deep access would threaten user privacy and go against its promise to delete chats after a certain period.

Earlier, OpenAI had accused the NYT of trying to carry out “mass surveillance” of its users. But after losing an earlier round in court, the company shifted tactics and is now trying to limit the number of logs that can be examined. The biggest concern? That private or sensitive conversations users thought were deleted might resurface as part of the legal proceedings.

To find a middle ground, OpenAI proposed a compromise: allow the NYT’s team to analyze a smaller, statistically valid sample of around 20 million ChatGPT logs. This number was backed by computer science researcher Taylor Berg-Kirkpatrick, who said it would be enough to determine whether ChatGPT had reproduced paywalled articles or copyrighted material.

But the NYT and other news organizations rejected that offer. They’re demanding access to 120 million conversations — six times the sample size OpenAI suggested. The company says such an enormous data dump would create even more privacy risks and slow down the case for months.

Adding to the tension, OpenAI’s partner Microsoft is also locking horns with the NYT over its own internal AI tools. As the court date approaches, the outcome of these negotiations could decide not just the future of this lawsuit, but how AI companies handle user data and copyright claims going forward.