USA Today Co. Sues OpenAI Over Alleged Use of Newspaper Content in AI Training

The new Southern District of New York complaint seeks more than $250 million and asks for destruction of models and training sets alleged to incorporate plaintiffs’ work. The claims have not been adjudicated.

USA TODAY Co., Inc. and 13 affiliated plaintiff entities filed a copyright complaint against seven OpenAI defendants on October 8, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

The case, USA TODAY Co., Inc. v. OpenAI Foundation, No. 1:26-cv-08892, is another publisher-side challenge to the use of news content in generative AI systems. But it is important to keep the posture straight: this is a newly filed complaint, not a court ruling. The allegations have not been tested in court, and no merits decision has been verified.

According to the complaint, the 14 plaintiffs say they own copyrights in content published by 19 publications and allege that OpenAI acquired and used that content without authorization in model training and outputs. The complaint asserts three counts: copyright infringement, vicarious copyright infringement, and removal of copyright-management information under 17 U.S.C. § 1202. Its willfulness and damages assertions are also allegations.

Those are the plaintiffs’ allegations. The filing does not establish that OpenAI committed infringement, removed copyright-management information, acted willfully, or owes damages.

A demand exceeding $250 million and a request for model destruction

The plaintiffs seek damages exceeding $250 million, according to the complaint. In the prayer for relief, they separately ask the court to permanently enjoin the alleged conduct and to order, under 17 U.S.C. § 503(b), destruction of all GPT or other LLM models and training sets that incorporate their content.

Those are requested remedies, not relief the court has granted. Whether the court awards damages, enters an injunction, or orders destruction will depend on later proceedings and rulings that have not occurred.

This complaint adds another publisher action to the pending disputes over the use of copyrighted journalism in generative-AI development. OpenAI has not yet responded in this case, and the reviewed docket does not establish which defenses it will assert. No claim or defense has been resolved here.

The case may join a broader OpenAI copyright litigation cluster—but has not yet done so

The plaintiffs filed a statement of relatedness asking that the case be treated as related to In re OpenAI, Inc. Copyright Infringement Litigation, No. 1:25-md-03143.

If the court deems the case related or brings it into the MDL, that could affect assignment, scheduling, discovery, and coordination with overlapping cases. A public RECAP docket snapshot reviewed at 7:25 a.m. ET on October 9, 2026, did not show an order accepting relatedness, consolidating or reassigning the case, deciding the merits, or a response from OpenAI. Because no PACER account is available for this package, that snapshot is the available public record rather than an authenticated PACER refresh. The case therefore remained a newly filed complaint in the Southern District of New York on the record reviewed.

Why the filing matters

The lawsuit is a timely marker of the pressure surrounding training-data practices, particularly where the underlying works are commercially produced journalism. Its significance lies less in any immediate legal holding than in the scope of the allegations, the number of publications involved, and the breadth of the relief requested.

For publishers, the filing reflects a continuing effort to define the legal boundaries of using news content in generative AI systems. For AI companies, it is another case that may test how copyright law applies to model training and outputs.

Potential next developments include court action on relatedness or consolidation, OpenAI’s response, and later rulings on the pleaded claims. None should be assumed from the complaint alone.

Public docket snapshot: CourtListener RECAP docket, No. 1:26-cv-08892 Official docket: PACER Case Locator (search S.D.N.Y. No. 1:26-cv-08892) Filed complaint copy: DocumentCloud mirror of Dkt. 1