OpenAI is worth $157 billion. That valuation was built partly on journalism that publishers like Seattle Times and Newsday created and never got paid for. Now they’re suing. I’ll tell you why the lawsuit is the wrong play and what the winning move actually looks like.
The Lawsuits Keep Coming
The New York Times fired the first shot in December 2023, suing OpenAI for billions in alleged copyright damages. According to The Guardian, that case is still grinding through the courts. Now Seattle Times and Newsday have filed their own suits, claiming OpenAI and Microsoft trained AI models on their news articles without permission or payment.
The publishers argue this is theft. OpenAI argues it’s fair use. Microsoft is named because of its reported $13 billion investment in OpenAI, according to Bloomberg, and its use of OpenAI models in products like Bing and Microsoft 365 Copilot.
According to the News/Media Alliance, AI companies scraped content from hundreds of thousands of websites to build their training data sets. For news publishers watching ad revenue fall year over year, seeing that content used for free to build a $157 billion company, according to The Wall Street Journal, is infuriating. That anger is understandable. The strategy, though, is another story.
Why Fighting AI in Court Is the Wrong Move
I respect the frustration. Seattle Times and Newsday built their reporting with real money and real reporters. Watching that work feed an AI training set without compensation stings. That’s a legitimate grievance.
But here’s my blunt take: litigation is a trap for news publishers who can’t afford a trap.
The New York Times has deep pockets and can run a lawsuit for years. Regional papers don’t have that cushion. Legal fees for federal copyright cases run into the millions before you even get to trial. Meanwhile, OpenAI raised over $6.6 billion in a single funding round, according to The Wall Street Journal. They will outlast most regional papers in court.
The smarter publishers figured this out early. AP signed a content licensing deal with OpenAI that reportedly earns seven figures annually, according to Axios. Axel Springer signed a similar deal. The Guardian entered an agreement too. These publishers are getting paid for past and future content while everyone else burns money in depositions.
According to the Reuters Institute Digital News Report, publishers that adopted AI tools in their newsrooms cut production costs by as much as 30% in 2024. That’s real money going back onto the balance sheet instead of into attorney fees.
Here’s the mindset shift most publishers won’t make: AI companies are not just stealing from you. They’re also showing you exactly how much your content is worth. That valuation is your negotiating position, not just a legal claim.
The poor mindset says sue them and make them pay for what they took. The rich mindset says charge them for what I’ll produce next, and use those same AI tools to cut my own costs by 30%.
Publishers also need to stop depending on a single revenue stream. Regional papers suing today often have no video presence, no newsletter revenue, and no membership model. If you’re a publisher or content creator who needs to add video without a big production budget, InVideo AI lets you turn written articles into short-form video content that earns on YouTube and social platforms. That’s a revenue line these papers should have built years ago.
What I Would Do If I Ran a News Publication
Stop waiting for courts to save your business model. They won’t move fast enough.
Here’s the play I’d run right now.
First, document every piece of content you publish with clear timestamps and metadata. Copyright disputes and licensing negotiations both depend on proving what you created and when. Build that system now if you haven’t.
Second, get your costs down. If AI can help you produce more reporting with the same team, use it. Use it before your competitors do.
Third, build revenue streams that don’t depend on display advertising. Newsletters, memberships, events, licensing, and video all pay. If you need affordable tools to build that stack without enterprise pricing, AppSumo regularly carries lifetime deals on publishing, email, and content software that cost a fraction of monthly subscriptions.
Fourth, watch the AP model. If OpenAI and Microsoft start paying content licensing fees at scale, publishers with clean archives and strong traffic will get the best deals. Publishers in active litigation may find those conversations closed to them.
Suing feels like justice. Licensing feels like giving in. But licensing pays the bills and keeps you in the fight. Justice is a luxury for companies that can afford to wait years for a verdict.
The Bottom Line
Seattle Times and Newsday deserve to be paid for their journalism. So does every publisher that got scraped without consent. But lawsuits take years and dollars that regional papers don’t have. The publishers who win this fight won’t win it in court. They’ll win by building new revenue, cutting costs with AI, and forcing licensing deals before their competitors get there first.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why are Seattle Times and Newsday suing OpenAI and Microsoft?
Both publishers claim OpenAI and Microsoft used their journalism to train AI models without permission or payment. The lawsuits allege copyright infringement and seek compensation for years of unauthorized use of their reporting archives.
How many news organizations have sued OpenAI over copyright?
Dozens of major news organizations have filed or joined copyright suits against OpenAI and Microsoft, starting with The New York Times in December 2023. The list includes national papers, regional publishers, and international media companies.
Could the OpenAI copyright lawsuits actually succeed?
Legal experts are divided. OpenAI argues that training on publicly available web content qualifies as fair use. Publishers argue that AI outputs closely reproducing their articles go beyond what fair use allows. The New York Times case is furthest along and will likely set the legal precedent for everyone else.
What is Microsoft’s role in these copyright lawsuits?
Microsoft invested a reported $13 billion in OpenAI, according to Bloomberg, and integrated OpenAI models into commercial products including Bing and Microsoft 365. Publishers named Microsoft as a defendant because it directly profits from products built on those AI models.
Are any publishers making money from AI instead of suing?
Yes. AP signed a licensing deal with OpenAI that reportedly earns seven figures annually, according to Axios. Axel Springer and The Guardian signed similar agreements. These publishers earn revenue from their archives while also gaining access to AI tools for their own newsrooms.
