US Government Intervenes in NYT v. OpenAI Copyright Suit, Backing AI Training as Fair Use

The Trump administration has officially entered the legal arena of AI copyright, filing a statement of interest in The New York Times’ landmark lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft. In a move that signals a significant shift in federal policy regarding intellectual property and artificial intelligence, US attorneys argued that training large language models (LLMs) on copyrighted text constitutes fair use under current copyright law.

The intervention comes as the Times seeks billions of dollars in damages, alleging that OpenAI unlawfully used its articles to train its systems. The administration’s filing contends that the Times is attempting to "narrow fair-use doctrine" in a way that is inconsistent with basic copyright principles. The attorneys emphasized that LLMs are already driving breakthroughs in research and that constraining their development based on a "misunderstanding of fair use doctrine" would thwart creative and scientific progress while hindering "American prosperity and economic mobility."

This legal stance aligns with the administration’s broader National AI Legislative Framework, which has previously argued that AI training should be protected under fair use. The filing also highlights a specific political dynamic, as President Trump is currently pursuing a separate defamation suit against The New York Times. However, the legal argument stands on its own within the context of the ongoing copyright disputes between media outlets and AI labs.

The outcome of this case could set a critical precedent for the industry. While a 2025 decision regarding Anthropic found that training on lawfully purchased books was legal but piracy was not—resulting in a $1.5 billion settlement with authors—the NYT case specifically targets the use of news articles. The administration’s position suggests a federal preference for an open training environment, even as dozens of media outlets, including the Associated Press and Vox Media, have entered into licensing deals with AI companies. The US attorneys warned that imposing broad copyright liability that renders model training impermissible without licensing would be "legally incorrect" and contrary to the constitutional objective of copyright to promote the progress of science and useful arts.