Skip to content
Cyberttak.
· 2 min read

OpenAI published court-brief excerpts from creators and academics defending fair use in AI training

The excerpts come from creators, accessibility advocates and legal experts who argue that fair use supports AI training.

By CyberttakPublished · 10:08

In brief

OpenAI lets outside voices argue fair use

OpenAI published excerpts from court briefs. Creators, academics and legal experts argue fair use supports AI training. It is one side's curated selection.

The white OpenAI logo is centered against a dark digital background featuring a connected network of lines and glowing points
The white OpenAI logo is centered against a dark digital background featuring a connected network of lines and glowing pointsCredit: images5.alphacoders.com

OpenAI has put together excerpts from court briefs filed by people outside the company. The collection is called "Fair use benefits everyone" and was published on 30 October 2026.

The authors of the briefs include creators, academics, accessibility advocates and legal experts. The source says they were written for court, and OpenAI is now sharing parts of them.

What is fair use?

Fair use is a legal idea. In some cases, it lets people use protected material without asking the owner first. Courts decide where the line sits.

The argument being made

The common thread in the excerpts is that fair use supports two things: training AI systems and innovation more broadly. That is the case OpenAI wants readers to see, told through other people's voices.

Notice the choice of speakers. Instead of a company statement alone, the page leans on writers, scholars and legal specialists. Accessibility advocates are in the mix too, which signals that the argument is not only about commercial products.

Imagine a lawyer handing a judge a stack of letters from supporters. The stack does not settle the case, but it shows who is standing behind a position.

This is OpenAI's own page, so it is a curated selection. It is the company's choice of which voices to show.

Limits

The excerpt we have is short. It does not name the cases, the courts or the individual authors, and it does not quote the briefs themselves. It also gives no ruling, and it does not show any briefs that argue the other side. Readers should treat this as one side's presentation of its supporters.

Source: OpenAI News