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
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.
Source and context
Original text
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
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 caseAssociation of American Publishers argues that OpenAI's training copies are not transformative
Association of American Publishers
“OpenAI's Copying for AI Training Is Not a Transformative Use.”Read statement
Authors Guild and fellow plaintiffs say OpenAI's training copies are not fair use
Authors Guild
“Defendants' Copying of Plaintiffs' Works to Train LLMs Was Not Fair Use.”Read statement
Share or embed this statement
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