Story
September 8, 2026
Publishers Demand AI Models Be Destroyed as Microsoft Calls Copilot’s Copying Rare
Publishers argue that AI companies turned unlicensed journalism into competing products that erode the business supporting reporting. Microsoft counters that Copilot’s scant textual overlap shows a tool serving a different purpose, not a substitute for the original work.
The latest front in the copyright war opened when The Seattle Times and Newsday sued OpenAI and Microsoft, alleging their journalism was used without permission to train AI systems. Their complaint joins litigation from The New York Times, authors and hundreds of local newspapers, all pressing a common concern: chatbots can answer readers’ questions without sending them back to the publishers that paid for the reporting.1
The two outlets are seeking an unusually sweeping remedy. Beyond damages, they want copies of their work, training datasets containing it and AI models incorporating it destroyed. Their case names Microsoft because its Copilot product is built on OpenAI technology. For the publishers, the dispute is not simply about isolated snippets: it is about commercial systems they say were built from newsroom work and now compete for audience and subscription revenue.
Microsoft’s response, filed Friday in related consolidated litigation brought by publishers and authors, attacks the premise that Copilot meaningfully replaces the underlying works. The company says it turned over 8.2 million chat logs selected as especially likely to contain news content. Its analysis found 59,545 conversations with at least 16 words in common with news material; an expert for the Center for Investigative Reporting identified 51 instances of “substantial overlap.” In a separate books analysis, Microsoft says only 24 responses contained 30 or more matching words.2
Microsoft argues those figures strengthen its fair-use defence: large language models may train on copyrighted material, but their output serves a “transformative purpose” rather than reproducing the original product. The publishers see the same technology as a direct market threat. The Times’ lead counsel, Ian Crosby, put the competing view starkly, saying discovery shows Microsoft and OpenAI “stole from The New York Times to make commercial products that substitute for its journalism.”2
Microsoft is seeking summary judgment, which could end the case early. If the judge rejects that bid, the fight over whether AI is transformation or substitution will move deeper into court.