OpenAI and Microsoft move for summary judgment against news publishers and authors in the consolidated copyright MDL, and the New York Times cross-moves the same day

What happened

Microsoft and OpenAI filed a coordinated set of summary-judgment declarations and Rule 56.1 statements on 2026-09-04 asking Judge Sidney Stein to rule outright in their favor against the News Plaintiffs, the Books/Authors Plaintiffs, and the Consolidated Class Plaintiffs in the consolidated AI-training copyright litigation, and the New York Times filed its own sealed cross-motion for summary judgment the same day. The docket for In re: OpenAI, Inc. Copyright Infringement Litigation, MDL No. 1:25-md-03143 (S.D.N.Y., Judge Sidney H. Stein), shows more than a dozen entries dated 2026-09-04 alone: Microsoft's declarations of Annette Hurst and John D. Lafferty and expert Catherine Tucker in support of its motion for summary judgment on the News Plaintiffs' consolidated claims (Doc. 1473) and the Books Plaintiffs' consolidated claims (Doc. 777); OpenAI's declarations of Robert Van Nest, Gregory K. Leonard, and Barbara Frederiksen-Cross in support of its own motion for summary judgment on the Consolidated Class Plaintiffs' claims (Doc. 1715); the New York Times's own sealed motion for summary judgment (Doc. 1728) and combined Rule 56.1 statement (Doc. 1730); and letter motions from both the Times and OpenAI's counsel asking Judge Stein for oral argument (Docs. 1734, 1736). This is the same MDL this map has tracked since the DOJ filed a statement of interest backing OpenAI and Microsoft's fair-use defense on 2026-09-01 — this entry is the next concrete step: dispositive cross-motions are now fully briefed and both sides are asking the court to decide the copyright question without a trial, rather than merely arguing a policy brief.
No hearing date has been set on either side's request for oral argument, leaving the timing of a dispositive ruling open. Both the New York Times and OpenAI's counsel filed letter motions asking Judge Stein to hear argument (Docs. 1734, 1736); both are pending with no date on the docket. The entries above are drawn directly from the PACER/CourtListener docket report rather than from coverage — the story surfaced through paywalled MLex headlines that could not be read, so the docket is the only source standing behind this. (CourtListener docket, 1:25-md-03143)
The Seattle Times and Newsday sued OpenAI and Microsoft in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York on Friday, alleging the companies scraped their journalism — including paywalled content — into training data for ChatGPT, Copilot and Bing's AI features without permission or compensation. The complaint echoes the New York Times' 2023 suit against the same defendants and seeks destruction of any copies and training datasets/models incorporating the papers' work, not just damages. Seattle Times CEO Alan Fisco told employees "we feel strongly that we must defend our content... from being used without our consent or compensation"; OpenAI said its models are trained on public data under fair use without commenting on the suit specifically, and Microsoft said it was "surprised" but open to discussing "solutions." The filing lands three days after the DOJ's fair-use statement of interest and one day after OpenAI and Microsoft moved for summary judgment against the existing News Plaintiffs in the consolidated MDL; whether the new suit is folded into MDL 1:25-md-03143 or proceeds as a standalone SDNY action is not yet shown on the docket. (Cyprus Mail, AP-fed)

Sources 2

CourtListener docket, 1:25-md-03143 courtlistener.com primary source
Cyprus Mail, AP-fed cyprus-mail.com unrated

Credibility ratings combine two public datasets: Lin et al. 2023, PNAS Nexus 2(9):pgad286 (CC BY 4.0) for the domain-quality score, and Wikipedia's perennial-sources list (CC BY-SA 4.0) for the reliability tier. A rating describes an outlet's general record, never this particular article. Unrated means absent from those datasets — not a judgement.