NYT-led group asks court to sanction OpenAI in US copyright dispute 41%

By Al Jazeera49%

7/9/2026, 9:17:54 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 9 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Confirmation Bias, and Begging the Question, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 20.8% saturation with 132 hits. Analysis detected 569 faulty-reasoning hits from 635 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 46.9% and a BS Rank of 41% (8,395 of 14,190 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 59.20% of the article peer group.

The case is one of many brought by copyright owners including authors, visual artists and music labels against tech companies such as OpenAI, Anthropic and Meta Platforms for allegedly misusing their material to train AI systems [File: Mark Lennihan/AP Photo] 
Published On 9 Jul 2026 9 Jul 2026 
The New York Times, the Daily News and other US media outlets are asking a United States federal judge to impose sanctions on OpenAI, escalating a fight over artificial intelligence (AI) and copyright that could shape the future of a struggling news industry. 
The newspapers allege the ChatGPT maker is hiding evidence important to what could be a landmark copyright infringement trial over how OpenAI and its business partner, Microsoft, built their AI technologies using millions of news articles. 
At issue is whether AI chatbots are unfairly competing as an information source, siphoning off web traffic without doing the journalistic work involved in gathering the news. 
list 1 of 4 FIFA World Cup 2026: Ranking the eight quarterfinalists’ chances of glory 
list 2 of 4 What happened to the beautiful game? 
list 3 of 4 Why the US Strategic Petroleum Reserve matters amid US-Iran tensions 
list 4 of 4 Canadian PM visits Saudi Arabia to strengthen energy, mining partnerships 
A filing on Thursday in a Manhattan federal courthouse alleges OpenAI “chose obstruction” over releasing data sets and ChatGPT logs that could show how the AI system used copyrighted news content. 
The plaintiffs are asking the judge to penalise the company for “discovery misconduct” that could distort evidence, saying a recent deposition of an OpenAI employee contradicts the company’s earlier claims. 
New York Daily News attorney Steven Lieberman said OpenAI has been “making misrepresentations” for two years about its ability to search for copyrighted content in its AI training datasets and logs. 
“This motion asks the court to punish OpenAI for hiding and destroying evidence showing how ChatGPT was trained on stolen journalism,” said Lieberman, who represents the Daily News and seven of its sister papers. 
OpenAI has previously argued that turning over ChatGPT conversation logs would risk violating users’ privacy. 
“As the Times’ case weakens and they’ve been forced to drop claims against us, they’re persisting with their efforts to invade the privacy of people who have nothing to do with this case, including by making these blatantly false allegations,” OpenAI spokesperson Drew Pusateri said in response to the newspapers’ filing, the Reuters news agency reported. 
The New York Times (NYT) sued OpenAI and Microsoft in late 2023, about a year after ChatGPT’s debut sparked a commercial AI boom and began changing the way people search for information online. 
The threat to news publications became even more apparent when Google in 2024 introduced AI-generated summaries at the top of online search results, cutting off the advertising dollars that come when people click a link to the information’s original source. 
The NYT was then joined by other news companies. 
The case is one of many brought by copyright owners including authors, visual artists and music labels against tech companies such as OpenAI, Anthropic and Meta Platforms for allegedly misusing their material to train AI systems. 
The Times has already spent more than $28m on fighting AI companies in court, according to filings with financial regulators that disclose its litigation costs. 
The costs include another lawsuit the newspaper filed last year against AI company Perplexity. 
The mounting costs come as a growing number of media organisations have signed licensing deals with OpenAI and other AI companies such as Google and Facebook parent Meta that typically pay the outlet a fee to be able to train AI systems on their news feeds or archives. 
The Associated Press was the first to announce such a deal with OpenAI in 2023. 
Confirmation Bias
12.3%
Anchoring Bias
0%
Availability Heuristic
0%
Representativeness Heuristic
0%
Hindsight Bias
0%
Overconfidence Bias
0%
Framing Effect
17.3%
Loss Aversion
6.3%
Status Quo Bias
0%
Sunk Cost Effect
3.9%
Optimism Bias
0%
Pessimism Bias
0%
Negativity Bias
20.8%
Self-Serving Bias
0%
Fundamental Attribution Error
0%
Actor-Observer Bias
0%
In-Group Bias
0%
Out-Group Homogeneity Bias
0%
Halo Effect
0%
Horn Effect
0%
Dunning-Kruger Effect
0%
Recency Bias
0%
Primacy Effect
0%
Blind-Spot Bias
0%
Ad Hominem
8.8%
Straw Man
0%
Appeal to Authority
0%
False Dilemma
4.3%
Slippery Slope
0%
Circular Reasoning
0%
Hasty Generalization
0%
Red Herring
0%
Bandwagon
0%
Appeal to Emotion
0%
Begging the Question
11%
Post Hoc (False Cause)
0%
Tu Quoque
0%
Burden of Proof
0%
Appeal to Nature
0%
Composition/Division
0%
Anecdotal
0%
No True Scotsman
0%
Ambiguity (Equivocation)
0%
Gambler’s Fallacy
0%
Middle Ground
0%
Personal Incredulity
0%
Special Pleading
0%
Genetic Fallacy
0%
Unattributed Quote
0%
Quote-first Misdirection
4.9%
Biased Writer Voice
0%
Indoctrination
0%
Politically Left Leaning Bias
0%
Politically Right Leaning Bias
0%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service
0%

635 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers19%attributed speech514writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Selected voice

Steven Lieberman

100%flagged-word coverage
65 attributed words54% of attributed speech54% writer coverage
Quote-first Misdirection-6.0 pts
Writer 6.0%Steven Lieberman 0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.