New York Times Moves to Amend Copyright Suit, Accusing Microsoft of Building Supercomputer for OpenAI

The New York Times filed a motion on Thursday to amend its copyright lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft. The amendment clarifies a contributory infringement claim, asserting that Microsoft created a bespoke supercomputing system—ranked among the world’s most powerful—to enable OpenAI to copy the newspaper’s copyrighted articles for its generative-AI products.

Ars Technica

The amendment follows a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision favoring Cox Communications, which tightened the test for contributory infringement by requiring proof of intentional inducement. After that precedent, the NYT seeks to align its claim with the new standard. The motion was filed on Thursday, June 2026, after the original suit was lodged (date not disclosed) and the Supreme Court ruling (date not disclosed).

Ars Technica

According to the filing, Microsoft built a custom supercomputing platform that ranks among the most powerful globally. The NYT alleges the system was purpose-built to process massive text corpora, including its articles, thereby facilitating large-scale copying for AI training. If upheld, the case could set a precedent for holding infrastructure providers liable for enabling AI models that incorporate copyrighted material, influencing how tech firms source and license training data.

Ars Technica

NYT spokesperson Graham James said the amendment “strengthens our case” and aligns with “new law and new evidence uncovered during discovery.” Microsoft’s spokesperson characterized the filing as “a last-ditch effort by the plaintiff to save its claim from unfavorable precedent set in other recent rulings,” suggesting the motion seeks to circumvent the Supreme Court’s decision.

Ars Technica

Microsoft’s response frames the amendment as a strategic maneuver rather than a substantive legal argument, implying the NYT is reacting to adverse case law instead of presenting new factual support.

Ars Technica

The filing does not disclose the specific evidence linking Microsoft’s supercomputer to the alleged copying, nor does it quantify the volume of NYT content purportedly used. Technical specifications of the system remain undisclosed, leaving a factual gap between the claim and publicly available information.

Ars Technica

• “Today, we asked the court for permission to file an amended complaint that further strengthens our case, clarifying our claim of contributory infringement against Microsoft based on new law and new evidence uncovered during discovery,” — Graham James, NYT spokesperson

Ars Technica

• “As we have long alleged, Microsoft actively encouraged OpenAI to steal our copyrighted works,” — Graham James, NYT spokesperson

Ars Technica

• “The Times does not seek any additional discovery in support of its amended claims.” — Graham James, NYT spokesperson

Ars Technica

• “a last-ditch effort by the plaintiff to save its claim from unfavorable precedent set in other recent rulings.” — Microsoft spokesperson

Ars Technica

The district court will rule on the motion to amend in the coming weeks. If granted, the case will proceed toward trial or settlement, and both parties have signaled readiness for further appeals given the broader stakes for AI development and copyright law.

Ars Technica