Court Orders OpenAI to Preserve ChatGPT Conversations in Copyright Dispute

A recent court order has forced OpenAI to preserve user conversations from ChatGPT, intensifying legal scrutiny in a major copyright case, New York Times v. Microsoft et al.

Danny Bradbury reports in Malwarebytes that the ruling challenges OpenAI’s ability to respect user privacy while responding to allegations that ChatGPT reproduces copyrighted content.  It raises significant questions about data retention, privacy, and legal accountability in the development of AI.

The lawsuit stems from claims that ChatGPT provided users with content so similar to that of news publishers that users no longer needed to access original paid sources.

The plaintiffs argued that deleted conversations might contain instances of this alleged copyright infringement. In January, Judge Ona T. Wang declined to order data preservation but warned OpenAI it must justify why it could not retain anonymized data.

OpenAI failed to do so, leading to a preservation order issued on May 13. The order requires OpenAI to retain all output data, including that which would otherwise be deleted upon user request or due to privacy laws.

OpenAI, which offers users the ability to disable chat history or use temporary chats, protested the order, stating it compromises its long-standing commitment to user privacy.

In its objection, the company warned that implementation would take months and could expose sensitive user data, including financial and personal details.

Attorneys should note the potential for a precedential law to emerge from this case, which could have a significant impact on copyright enforcement, privacy rights, and the functionality of AI.

Companies may be required to retain user data that could become evidentiary, despite privacy frameworks.

Lawyers representing tech developers or media organizations should prepare for increased litigation surrounding AI content sourcing and data governance, and may need to advise clients on striking a balance between innovation and compliance under tightening judicial expectations.