OpenAI defends model pretraining as fair use

OpenAIDefendant submitting a summary-judgment memorandum

OpenAI argues that the alleged pretraining use was transformative, did not display meaningful portions of the books to ChatGPT users and caused no legally cognizable harm.

“That alleged use was fair because it was highly transformative, did not display any meaningful portion of the books to ChatGPT users, and caused no cognizable harm.”

Original text

Read the original text (opens in a new tab)OpenAI's motion for summary judgment in the Authors Guild action · OpenAIDocument 1221, introduction and fair-use arguments

Where this statement fits

OpenAI says pretraining on authors' books is fair use; authors and publishers urge the court to reject it

OpenAI's September 4, 2026 summary-judgment motion argues that pretraining its models on authors' books was a transformative fair use that caused no legally cognizable market harm. The same day, the Authors Guild and the other class plaintiffs moved for partial summary judgment, asking the court to rule that OpenAI's training copies, its downloads of books from pirate sites and the transfers of books between OpenAI and Microsoft were not fair use. The authors argue that OpenAI copied their books to build models that generate competing works and deprived them of revenue from an existing market for training licenses. OpenAI argues that training extracts unprotectable statistical patterns for new uses and that the plaintiffs' dilution and licensing theories of harm are not legally cognizable. On October 29, the Association of American Publishers and three other publishing and licensing groups asked the court for leave to file a brief supporting the plaintiffs.

Read the full case

Case updates

Want the next important update?

Follow this case and get an email when an important development changes the record.

Important updates only. Free. Confirm your email to start. Unsubscribe anytime. How we handle your email.

Source and context

Original text

OpenAI's motion for summary judgment in the Authors Guild action (opens in a new tab) · OpenAIDocument 1221, introduction and fair-use arguments

About this source

OpenAI argues that model pretraining is transformative and causes no legally cognizable market harm. The filing is a party's argument.

Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Before the quotation

The motion identifies the authors' allegation that their books were used in pretraining.

After the quotation

OpenAI develops its arguments about transformation, substitution, market dilution and licensing.

How this statement is classified

Defended or excused

The label describes this statement's response within the context above.

Why this label?

Relative to unlicensed pretraining, OpenAI expressly argues the use is lawful fair use.

Recorded on
Published here

More from this case

Read the full case

Share or embed this statement

Quote card: OpenAI, OpenAI defends model pretraining as fair useDownload image (PNG)

The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the statement page.

Cite this record

Publisher
The Dispute Index
Title
OpenAI defends model pretraining as fair use
First published
Last updated
Permalink
https://disputeindex.com/events/7275-openai-argues-that-the-alleged-pretraining-use-was

Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.

The Dispute Index. "OpenAI defends model pretraining as fair use". First published: 2026-10-30. Last updated: 2026-10-30. https://disputeindex.com/events/7275-openai-argues-that-the-alleged-pretraining-use-was