Truace
Subscribe

To preserve the free press, courts must protect copyright

The unrestricted use of artificial intelligence has endangered the rules of copyright and threatened America's access to reliable, high-quality journalism. Judges have a chance to stop it. From our country’s beginning, the Founders recognized that American democracy would rely upon a flourishing independent press. The Constitution protects a free press through the First Amendment, of course, but also through a less celebrated provision

Truvace record2 min read1 sourceEvidence: Emerging · 30/100 — Commentary, opinion, or narrative review · 1 independent sourceJournalismTRV-2026-2381 · cite or check it
To preserve the free press, courts must protect copyright

In brief

Danielle Coffey, president and CEO of the News/Media Alliance, argues in an opinion column that courts should rule for news publishers in their copyright fights with OpenAI and Microsoft. The New York Times sued both companies in 2023, alleging OpenAI trained its models on the paper's content without permission.

More than a dozen of the earliest suits, including The New York Times v. Microsoft, have reached summary judgment, where a judge will rule for the first time on whether AI tools may use copyrighted news content for real-time answers. Coffey says her group just filed an amicus brief urging judges to side with publishers.

Coffey's case is an advocacy position, not a measured finding. She says a ruling for the AI companies would weaken copyright law and threaten the news industry, and she points to existing licensing deals as a workable alternative.

Main points

  1. The New York Times sued Microsoft and OpenAI in 2023, alleging OpenAI trained its AI models on the paper's content without permission.
  2. More than a dozen of the earliest news publisher suits are at summary judgment, where a judge will rule for the first time on AI tools using copyrighted news for real-time answers.
  3. The News/Media Alliance filed an amicus brief urging judges to rule for the publishers.
  4. Coffey argues ChatGPT answers replace visits to news sites, unlike traditional search engines that send users to sources.
  5. OpenAI and Microsoft argue their use of news content is fair use; Coffey says they sometimes repackage content but often copy it literally.
  6. Coffey says a licensing market already exists for publishers to sell content to AI companies, and that it depends on publisher control of content.

The problem

The News/Media Alliance's president argues that ChatGPT's real-time answers substitute for visits to news sites, cutting publishers' subscription and advertising revenue.

The full story

The dispute turns on fair use. Coffey notes that newspapers back fair use, and that news reporting is named in the Copyright Act as an example. She says no legal precedent supports taking content to compete with its producers, and that courts have long held summarizing or excerpting can infringe if it substitutes for the original.

On the economics, she says traditional search linked search, traffic and content production on the open web, while ChatGPT's real-time answers break that link by replacing visits to publishers' sites. She compares this with AI firms paying utilities for power and buying chips, asking why information should be free.

Coffey says consumers will not and should not go back to a world without AI. Her proposed remedy is compensation through licensing deals, which she describes as a sustainable path for both industries, and she warns that without publisher control millions of Americans could lose access to quality journalism.

Sources

  1. JournalismCharleston Post and Courier2026-11-04

The debate