Trump administration files amicus brief backing OpenAI's fair-use defense in NYT copyright lawsuit

The Trump administration filed a 20-page amicus brief in NYT v. OpenAI, the copyright lawsuit pending in the Southern District of New York, arguing that training LLMs on copyrighted material without permission should qualify as fair use. The brief also argues a restrictive fair-use reading would harm US AI competitiveness, citing a Trump executive order on AI leadership. This is a filed legal argument, not a ruling, and the administration has no authority over the case's outcome.

This signals the executive branch's policy stance on AI training data ahead of a decision that will shape fair-use precedent for every LLM developer, not just OpenAI. It gives OpenAI, Anthropic and others political cover and a citable federal position, useful for lobbying and future litigation, even though it does not bind Judge Alsup or any other court. Enterprises and investors get a clearer read on regulatory direction, but no immediate change to legal risk or obligations.

The framing that this "could carry weight" overstates a non-binding filing from a party with no jurisdiction over the ruling; amicus briefs are common and their practical influence on judges varies widely. Coverage lacks a link to the actual filing, so the brief's exact legal reasoning cannot be independently verified here. Background references to the Anthropic settlement risk conflating a $1.5B payout for pirated acquisition with the separate question of whether training itself is fair use.

1. 01Judge Alsup's eventual ruling or any order in NYT v. OpenAI that references or cites the DOJ brief
2. 02Whether other administration agencies or Congress follow with formal rulemaking or legislation on AI training and copyright, versus this remaining a one-off filing
3. 03Whether NYT's legal team or other plaintiffs (e.g., other publishers, authors' groups) file responses specifically rebutting the brief's competitiveness argument