Elderly journalists take legal action against ChatGPT for intellectual property theft
- Two 80-something journalists, Nick and his friend, discovered their work might be stolen by ChatGPT.
- They enlisted a family member to sue the companies responsible for the AI chatbot.
- The legal action aims to protect the integrity of their 'written word'.
In a recent development, two prominent figures in the literary world, Gage and Basbanes, have come together to file a lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft. They claim that these tech giants have been unlawfully using copyrighted work from writers, sparking a legal battle that is unfolding both in court and in the public eye. The lawsuit aims to represent a class of writers who allege that their work has been systematically pilfered by the companies in question. Gage, known for his bestselling memoir and the subsequent film adaptation, and Basbanes, a respected writer on literary culture, have taken a stand for the future of their craft. They express concerns about the impact of technology, such as AI, on the writing profession. Gage, in particular, worries that advancements like ChatGPT could hinder investigative journalism and make it harder for aspiring writers to pursue their passion. The lawsuit highlights a broader debate surrounding the ethics of content scraping by tech companies, with some news organizations explicitly stating their opposition to such practices. The legal battle is expected to navigate this "gray area" and address the complexities of intellectual property rights in the digital age. Despite the challenges, Gage and Basbanes remain steadfast in their commitment to upholding the integrity of their work and the future of writing. As the case unfolds, the literary community watches closely, recognizing the significance of this legal battle for the industry as a whole. Gage's personal journey, marked by professional risks and a quest for truth, underscores the stakes involved. With the future of journalism and writing at stake, the outcome of this lawsuit could have far-reaching implications for the creative landscape and the protection of intellectual property rights.