OpenAI, Microsoft defeat US consumer-privacy lawsuit for now
Adds comment from plaintiffs' attorney in paragraph 4
By Blake Brittain
May 24 (Reuters) -A California federal judge on Friday dismissed a proposed class-action lawsuit that accused OpenAI and Microsoft MSFT.O of using stolen personal data to train OpenAI's popular chatbot ChatGPT and other generative artificial intelligence systems.
U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria said in the two-page ruling that the 204-page complaint was "not only excessive in length" but "contains swaths of unnecessary and distracting allegations making it nearly impossible to determine the adequacy of the plaintiffs' legal claims."
The judge said the plaintiffs could file an amended complaint.
"Our clients are on the right side of this, and we will amend with the requested precision and brevity," the plaintiffs' attorney Ryan Clarkson of Clarkson Law Firm said in a statement.
OpenAI and Microsoft did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the decision.
The case was brought last year by public-interest focused Clarkson Law Firm and personal-injury law giant Morgan & Morgan. They accused OpenAI and its largest financial backer Microsoft of misusing personal data from social media platforms and other sites to teach AI how to respond to human prompts. The companies denied the claims.
Many prominent copyright owners including authors and newspapers have also separately sued tech companies including OpenAI and Microsoft over the alleged misuse of their work to train AI systems.
Chhabria said on Friday that the consumer lawsuit contained "irrelevant" asides -- including "three-plus pages discussing copyright concerns" despite not including any copyright claims -- as well as "rhetoric and policy grievances that are not suitable for resolution by federal courts."
"The development of AI technology may well give rise to grave concerns for society, but the plaintiffs need to understand that they are in a court of law, not a town hall meeting," Chhabria said.
The case is Cousart v. OpenAI LP, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, No. 3:23-cv-04557.
For the plaintiffs: Michael Ram, John Yanchunis and Ryan McGee of Morgan & Morgan Complex Litigation Group; Ryan Clarkson, Yana Hart and Tracey Cowan of Clarkson Law Firm
For OpenAI: Michael Rhodes, Matthew Brown and Bethany Lobo of Cooley
For Microsoft: Emily Henn, Kate Cahoy, Ashley Simonsen and Isaac Chaput of Covington & Burling
Read more:
OpenAI, Microsoft hit with new US consumer privacy class action
Reporting by Blake Brittain in Washington
Related Assets
Latest News
Disclaimer: The XM Group entities provide execution-only service and access to our Online Trading Facility, permitting a person to view and/or use the content available on or via the website, is not intended to change or expand on this, nor does it change or expand on this. Such access and use are always subject to: (i) Terms and Conditions; (ii) Risk Warnings; and (iii) Full Disclaimer. Such content is therefore provided as no more than general information. Particularly, please be aware that the contents of our Online Trading Facility are neither a solicitation, nor an offer to enter any transactions on the financial markets. Trading on any financial market involves a significant level of risk to your capital.
All material published on our Online Trading Facility is intended for educational/informational purposes only, and does not contain – nor should it be considered as containing – financial, investment tax or trading advice and recommendations; or a record of our trading prices; or an offer of, or solicitation for, a transaction in any financial instruments; or unsolicited financial promotions to you.
Any third-party content, as well as content prepared by XM, such as: opinions, news, research, analyses, prices and other information or links to third-party sites contained on this website are provided on an “as-is” basis, as general market commentary, and do not constitute investment advice. To the extent that any content is construed as investment research, you must note and accept that the content was not intended to and has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research and as such, it would be considered as marketing communication under the relevant laws and regulations. Please ensure that you have read and understood our Notification on Non-Independent Investment. Research and Risk Warning concerning the foregoing information, which can be accessed here.
