OpenAI and Microsoft Moved to Strike Research Report
The technology companies challenged a non-peer-reviewed report in a copyright infringement lawsuit.
Updated on Sept. 24, 2026 in Artificial Intelligence
Live Poll
Should litigants be required to publicly disclose all funding sources for research presented in court?
OpenAI and Microsoft have filed a motion to exclude a research report from their ongoing copyright infringement litigation. The defendants allege the plaintiffs presented a privately funded, non-peer-reviewed study as independent research.
Why it matters
This move highlights a heated dispute over the evidence presented in a high-stakes case regarding AI-generated books. Defendants claim the plaintiffs lack proof of harm after years of discovery, prompting them to challenge the validity of the provided research.
The companies allege that Susman Godfrey LLP paid $100,000 to Professor Tuhin Chakrabarty of Stony Brook University to produce the report. This study was relied upon during litigation despite its lack of peer review.
The players
OpenAI
OpenAI is an artificial intelligence research organization that develops large language models used in generative AI products.
Microsoft
Microsoft is a multinational technology corporation that provides cloud infrastructure and software services integrated with AI technologies.
Susman Godfrey LLP
Susman Godfrey LLP is a national litigation firm currently representing book and news publishers in intellectual property cases.
Tuhin Chakrabarty
Tuhin Chakrabarty is a professor at Stony Brook University who authored the research report cited in the litigation.
The details
OpenAI and Microsoft argue the report, which details market dilution of AI-generated books, was improperly used outside the formal expert-disclosure process. They contend the funding source was concealed to mask the lack of independent oversight.
Timeline
The motion to strike was filed by the companies on September 24, 2026.
The Tech Race
This motion represents a significant tactical escalation within the ongoing copyright infringement multidistrict litigation. It underscores the intense scrutiny applied to evidence as companies compete to establish legal precedents for the use of protected works in AI training.
This dispute determines how artificial intelligence models may be regulated and restricted in the future. The outcome will influence the availability of AI-generated content and the compensation models for original authors and publishers.
The takeaway
Legal battles over AI training data are increasingly centering on the transparency of expert testimony and research. Readers should note that the admissibility of such studies will play a critical role in setting future standards for generative AI development.
Further reading
For more context on how courts are handling these disputes, visit the Artificial Intelligence section.
Source note: This article includes information reported by Bloomberglaw.
Live Poll
Should litigants be required to publicly disclose all funding sources for research presented in court?
