iTechGuides is reader-supported. When you buy through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. Learn more
USA Today Co. and affiliated publishers filed a copyright lawsuit against OpenAI in federal court in New York on October 8, 2026. The publishers allege that OpenAI used their journalism to train its models without permission and that chatbot answers can substitute for their reporting. Those claims have not been decided by a court.
What the publishers say OpenAI did
The case, USA Today Co., Inc. v. OpenAI Foundation, No. 1:26-cv-08892, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. USA Today Co. and affiliated publishers say their copyrighted work spans 19 publications, including the Indy Star, The Arizona Republic, and Detroit Free Press.
According to same-day reporting on the complaint, the publishers allege that OpenAI used hundreds of thousands of their articles without authorization to train GPT models. They also claim that chatbot outputs can repackage journalism in ways that compete with the original reporting. The alleged article count and substitution effects are claims by the plaintiffs, not findings independently established by the court.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
The plaintiffs reportedly seek more than $250 million in damages. That is the amount of relief they are asking for, not an award. Same-day reporting on a docket entry describes exhibits concerning copyright registrations and GPT-5.6 output examples; those descriptions are docket reporting, not a determination that the exhibits prove the allegations.
#1 Best Overall
Why the case raises a fair-use dispute
U.S. copyright law evaluates fair use through four nonexclusive factors. No single factor decides every case, and the analysis depends on the specific works and uses at issue. The broader OpenAI copyright litigation reflects competing arguments about those questions; it does not establish a settled rule that AI training is always fair use or always infringement.
- Purpose and character: Courts consider how the material was used, including whether the use is transformative and whether it is commercial.
- Nature of the work: The analysis considers the kind of copyrighted work involved. News reporting includes factual material, but the particular expression in an article may still be protected.
- Amount and substantiality: Courts examine how much was copied and whether the portion used was important to the work.
- Market effect: Courts consider effects on the work’s existing or potential markets and value, including arguments about substitution or licensing.
In the broader copyright litigation, publishers and authors argue that unauthorized copying to develop models is not fair use and harms existing or potential markets. OpenAI and Microsoft argue that model training is transformative, that it extracts statistical patterns rather than supplying articles as substitutes, and that claimed market harms are speculative or legally irrelevant. Those are positions in the broader litigation, not necessarily a complete account of OpenAI’s response to the new USA Today complaint.
How OpenAI has described its position elsewhere
On a public page addressing the separate New York Times case, OpenAI says its models are trained on publicly available information and grounded in fair use. The company also points to publisher partnerships and controls for expressing crawler preferences. That is OpenAI’s general stated position in a different case; it is not an answer to the USA Today complaint, nor does it establish that the plaintiffs accepted those practices.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitches2Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problems3Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteHow this new suit relates to the broader litigation
The USA Today action is distinct from the broader consolidated copyright litigation against OpenAI. In that multidistrict litigation, competing summary-judgment motions were filed on September 4, 2026. A tracker updated in October reported that the court was considering whether claims or defenses could be decided without a trial. Judge Sidney Stein set October 16, 2026, as the deadline for motions seeking leave to submit amicus briefs in connection with those motions.
The available docket reporting does not confirm that the USA Today action has been formally consolidated with or related to that multidistrict litigation. The October 16 deadline concerns the broader litigation, not a ruling on the new complaint.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.Has a court ruled on the USA TODAY case?
No ruling on the merits of this newly filed action is established in the available reporting. The complaint presents the publishers’ allegations, and the fair-use questions remain contested. Filing a lawsuit—and requesting damages—does not mean a court has found infringement or awarded money.
Quick Recap
Rank #4
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →
