Influencer
YouTubers Sue OpenAI Alleging Unauthorized Use in AI Training
OpenAI faces a new legal challenge as YouTuber David Millette has filed a class action lawsuit against the company, alleging unauthorized use of video content for AI training.
The lawsuit, filed in federal court in San Francisco, claims OpenAI used a speech recognition system called Whisper to transcribe over 1 million hours of YouTube videos without creators’ consent.
The complaint stems from a New York Times report in April, which revealed OpenAI’s efforts to address a data shortage for training its language models.
According to the lawsuit, OpenAI developed Whisper to transcribe YouTube audio, aiming to train the next version of GPT.
Millette’s lawsuit alleges that OpenAI violated YouTube’s terms of service, prohibiting the use of content for independent applications and accessing services through automated means.
The complaint seeks at least $5 million in damages and a court order to prevent OpenAI from using the content further.
Notably, the lawsuit does not include a claim for copyright infringement. Instead, it focuses on unjust enrichment and unfair competition related to using video transcripts without consent or compensation.
The AI Legal Saga Continues
This case joins a growing litigation against AI companies over the unauthorized use of copyrighted material. Artists, authors, news publishers, and record labels have initiated similar legal actions.
Tesla and X CEO Elon Musk has also filed a new lawsuit against OpenAI and its CEO, Sam Altman. Musk accuses the company of abandoning its original non-profit mission by reserving some of its most sophisticated tech for commercial customers.
Millette’s lawsuit also mentions that some Google employees were aware of OpenAI’s use of YouTube videos for training data but did not act, potentially due to concerns about facing similar issues with their AI development efforts.
A recent ruling in a separate case against OpenAI involving top authors saw a federal judge dismiss an unfair competition claim.
The judge found that federal law bars such claims when they relate to material within the subject matter of copyright.