# OpenAI staff recognized AI’s existential threat to publishers, New York Times claims in ongoing lawsuit > Source: > Published: 2026-09-17 18:30:16+00:00 OpenAI official logo (public domain, Wikimedia Commons) — CryptoBriefing brand treatment # OpenAI staff recognized AI’s existential threat to publishers, New York Times claims in ongoing lawsuit Internal depositions and discovery reveal OpenAI had tools to track copyrighted content before the landmark copyright case was even filed OpenAI employees were apparently well aware that their technology posed a serious threat to the publishers whose content helped build it. That’s the picture emerging from discovery materials in The New York Times’ landmark copyright lawsuit against OpenAI and [Microsoft](https://cryptobriefing.com/markets/microsoft/), where internal documents suggest the AI company had more visibility into its use of copyrighted material than it initially let on. ## What discovery uncovered The Times originally filed its copyright infringement lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft in December 2023, alleging that the companies used NYT articles spanning from 1928 to 2024 to train models like ChatGPT without authorization. The core claim: this practice siphons traffic and revenue from the original journalism that made the training data valuable in the first place. What makes the latest developments particularly thorny for OpenAI is what emerged during depositions. In July 2026, testimony revealed that OpenAI had conducted internal searches for copyrighted content before the lawsuit was even filed. That directly contradicts earlier representations that the company could not effectively monitor what was in its training data. Discovery also surfaced the existence of a database containing roughly 78 million ChatGPT conversations that were being monitored for copyright compliance. The Times and other publishers have seized on these findings to file motions for sanctions, arguing that OpenAI’s earlier claims about its inability to track copyrighted content were misleading at best. NYT Publisher A.G. Sulzberger has not minced words about the stakes. In June 2026, he described the unauthorized use of journalism to train AI as “brazen theft of intellectual property,” framing it as an unprecedented threat to the financial viability of original reporting. ### AI, tech, and the markets they move—in one daily briefing. Daily. Free. Join 34,000+ readers across crypto, finance, and policy. ## The case keeps growing As of September 2026, approximately 160 regional publications have joined the lawsuit, transforming it from a single plaintiff’s grievance into a broad industry reckoning. The case has progressed to summary judgment motions before Judge Sidney H. Stein in the Southern District of New York. Complicating things further, the US Department of Justice filed a brief supporting OpenAI’s fair use defense. ## Why this matters beyond the courtroom If the courts side with publishers, every major AI company would face pressure to establish licensing agreements with content creators, fundamentally changing the economics of training large language models. The 160 regional outlets that joined the case in September 2026 underscore how widespread that anxiety has become. These aren’t just legacy media giants with deep legal budgets. They’re local newsrooms already operating on razor-thin margins, where even modest traffic declines can mean the difference between covering a city council meeting and not. The internal evidence that OpenAI staff understood these dynamics, that they recognized the threat their technology posed to the very publishers whose content fueled it, adds a layer of moral weight to what is ultimately a legal question. The consolidation of cases, the DOJ’s intervention, and the pending summary judgment motions all suggest that a consequential ruling could arrive within the coming months. **Disclosure:** This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our [Editorial Policy](https://cryptobriefing.com/editorial-policy/).