Unsealed filings show Microsoft exec called OpenAI’s data scraping ‘largest theft of labor in history’
Newly unsealed court documents in the New York Times copyright lawsuit reveal that executives from OpenAI and Microsoft privately acknowledged their AI products substitute for news content, threatening journalism. Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella said chatbots have “replaced” visits to publisher websites. A Microsoft executive, Dr. Brent Hecht, internally described copying millions of articles without permission as potentially “the largest labor theft in human history.” OpenAI’s Nick Turley wrote that their products are “largely substitutive, period.” The Trump administration has urged the court to rule AI training on copyrighted works as fair use.
Editorial responsibility
- No named human review is recorded for this page.
- Reports are grouped by semantic similarity and deterministic rules. Language models may assist titles, summaries, translation and cross-source analysis; the page reads the event directly, while its address stays stable when the title changes.
- Summary covers the current reports
Cross-source coverage
Common ground
- Both sides agree that Microsoft's internal memo calling AI data scraping 'the largest theft of labor in human history' is a significant admission of wrongdoing.
- There is shared recognition that Silicon Valley's business model has harmed creators by taking their work without consent or compensation.
- Both agree that the current system fails to adequately protect journalists and content creators from exploitation by tech giants.
Points of contention
- The Eastern agent argues China's regulatory system protects creators through proactive oversight and mediation, while the Western agent claims it suppresses dissent and lacks independent accountability.
- The Western agent insists that the absence of lawsuits in China proves creators have no real rights, while the Eastern agent says it shows efficient governance without need for litigation.
- The Eastern agent frames the issue as digital colonialism and a geopolitical power struggle, while the Western agent sees it as a fight for individual rights versus corporate and state control.
- The Western agent argues China's model is state-enabled extraction under censorship, while the Eastern agent says it's a functional alternative that prioritizes social responsibility over shareholder value.
Blind spots
- Neither side fully addresses how smaller developing nations, caught between Western tech giants and Chinese state-controlled systems, can protect their own creators and data sovereignty.
- The debate overlooks the role of independent creators and small publishers who lack the resources to navigate either legal system or regulatory framework.
- Both agents assume their own system is the only viable model, ignoring potential hybrid approaches that combine elements of regulation, litigation, and mediation.
WorldAttention’s read
This debate reveals a deep divide between two fundamentally different approaches to balancing innovation with creator rights. The Western model, as exposed by the Microsoft memo, allows powerful corporations to extract value from creators until public scandal forces legal action, but it also enables open debate and courtroom accountability. The Chinese model prioritizes state-led regulation and mediation to prevent exploitation before it happens, but it does so within a system that limits independent oversight and free expression. Both sides agree that Silicon Valley's practices amount to theft, but they disagree sharply on whether China offers a genuine alternative or just a different form of control. The core unresolved question is whether creator protection is better served by transparent, adversarial legal systems or by efficient, state-managed frameworks—and whether the global multipolar order can create space for diverse solutions that truly empower creators rather than just shifting power from corporations to governments.
Reporting timeline
Microsoft Employee Calls AI Training on NYT Texts 'Greatest Theft in Human History'
An internal memo by senior Microsoft employee Brent Hect, revealed in a court document, describes the unauthorized use of millions of New York Times articles to train AI models as an 'unfathomable theft of unprecedented magnitude' and possibly the 'largest theft of labor in the history of humanity.' The New York Times is suing Microsoft and OpenAI for suspected infringement of intellectual property rights, alleging OpenAI used content from over ten million news texts, nearly one-third from the NYT alone. Hect also accused OpenAI of 'inadvertent concealment' in identifying NYT content. Microsoft downplayed the remarks, stating they reflect the 'personal opinion of an individual employee' and not company views. The lawsuit is ongoing alongside a similar case against AI firm Perplexity AI.
Read sourceCourt records show Microsoft executive called AI the ‘largest theft of labor’ in history
Court records reveal that a Microsoft executive described AI as the 'largest theft of labor' in history, according to a Washington Post report. This quote is part of a broader legal battle where news outlets, including The New York Times, argue that such statements from OpenAI and Microsoft executives threaten their copyright defense. The New York Times claims OpenAI staff knew the 'existential threat' AI posed to publishers. Meanwhile, an appeals court rejected an expansive new copyright claim, as reported by the EFF. Ars Technica and Reuters also covered the story, highlighting the ongoing dispute over AI training data and copyright infringement.
Read sourceMicrosoft privately called OpenAI's data practices 'theft' in unsealed court filings
Newly unsealed court filings reveal that Microsoft privately labeled OpenAI's data practices as 'theft,' even as both companies scraped paywalled content from The New York Times and used it to build datasets. Internal warnings indicated that such actions would devastate publishers. The filings expose the companies' private acknowledgment of the controversial data scraping methods they employed, despite their public stances on AI development and copyright issues.
Read sourceShow 2 older updatesHide older updates
Unsealed Documents Reveal Microsoft, OpenAI Views on AI Scraping and Publisher Threat
Newly unsealed documents in the New York Times v. OpenAI and Microsoft copyright case reveal internal statements from executives at both companies. Microsoft executive Brent Hecht described AI scraping as 'the largest theft of labor in human history' in an internal memo. OpenAI executive Nick Turley stated that chatbots pose an 'existential threat' to publishers. The documents disclose the parties' internal positions regarding the acquisition of training data and market substitution, highlighting the tension between copyright litigation and fair use defenses in the ongoing legal battle.
OpenAI and Microsoft Executives Acknowledge AI Threatens Journalism in Court Documents
Partially unsealed court documents reveal that senior executives from OpenAI and Microsoft acknowledged in testimony that their AI products substitute for news content, posing a substantial threat to journalism. Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella stated that chatbot conversations have 'replaced' users' visits to publishers' websites. OpenAI senior executive Nick Turley wrote, 'Our products are largely substitutive, period.' The documents are from summary judgment motions in a multi-party lawsuit alleging unauthorized use of news articles for AI training. The Trump administration has urged the court to rule that training AI on copyrighted works constitutes 'fair use.' Internal communications show OpenAI employees discussed bypassing The New York Times' paywall for data scraping, with president Greg Brockman responding 'Ah, nice.' Microsoft's director of applied sciences, Dr. Brent Hecht, stated that copying millions of news articles without permission could constitute 'the largest labor theft in human history.'
Read source