{"id":382617,"date":"2026-10-30T03:48:00","date_gmt":"2026-10-30T10:48:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/cms-articles.softonic.io\/en\/?p=382617"},"modified":"2026-10-30T03:48:01","modified_gmt":"2026-10-30T10:48:01","slug":"wikimedia-warns-in-new-filing-chatgpt-ruling-could-hurt-the-open-web","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cms-articles.softonic.io\/en\/wikimedia-warns-in-new-filing-chatgpt-ruling-could-hurt-the-open-web\/","title":{"rendered":"Wikimedia warns in new filing: ChatGPT ruling could hurt the open web"},"content":{"rendered":"

The Wikimedia Foundation has filed an amicus brief in The New York Times\u2019 lawsuit against Microsoft and OpenAI, asking the court not to hand down a one-size-fits-all copyright ruling<\/strong> on AI training. In the filing, Wikimedia argues that training can, in some cases, count as transformative fair use, even in a case focused on generative AI.<\/p>\n

\r\n
\r\n
\r\n
\r\n \"ChatGPT\"\r\n <\/div>\r\n
\r\n ChatGPT<\/span>\r\n Download<\/a>\r\n <\/div>\r\n
\r\n <\/path><\/path><\/text><\/svg>\r\n <\/div>\r\n <\/div>\r\n
\r\n <\/span>\r\n <\/div>\r\n
\r\n \r\n <\/div>\r\n <\/a>\r\n <\/div>\r\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

At the same time, Wikimedia draws a line between training and output. Its position is that AI training may sometimes qualify<\/strong> as transformative fair use, while chatbot responses that reproduce protected or Creative Commons text without attribution, or break other license terms, can still amount to infringement.<\/p>\n\n

Wikimedia also presents the case as larger than a single lawsuit. AI chatbots depend heavily on Wikipedia<\/a> and can pull traffic away from it, which weakens the volunteer community and the broader free-knowledge project. And if the court adopts an overly simple rule<\/a>, it could either shut down genuinely transformative uses or give AI companies room to ignore licensing altogether<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n

The brief also says that human visits have dropped 8% since January 2024<\/strong>, while multimedia scraping bandwidth is up 50%. But the picture isn\u2019t one-directional. Large language models can also help Wikipedia editors catch vandalism, copyright issues, doxxing, and weak articles, so a blanket rule against training could end up hurting public-interest tools too.<\/p>\n\n

If you follow AI copyright fights, this filing deserves attention: according to Wikimedia Foundation figures, Wikimedia Enterprise brought in $8.3 million<\/strong> in 2024-2025, up 148% year over year, from customers that include Google, Amazon, and Microsoft. Even so, that still makes up only about 4% of total income, which means donations remain the foundation\u2019s core support.<\/p>\n\n

You can read the brief in the court record.<\/p>\n

\r\n
\r\n
\r\n
\r\n \"Wikipedia\"\r\n <\/div>\r\n
\r\n Wikipedia<\/span>\r\n Download<\/a>\r\n <\/div>\r\n
\r\n <\/path><\/path><\/text><\/svg>\r\n <\/div>\r\n <\/div>\r\n
\r\n <\/span>\r\n <\/div>\r\n
\r\n \r\n <\/div>\r\n <\/a>\r\n <\/div>\r\n<\/div>\n\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Wikimedia Foundation has filed an amicus brief in The New York Times\u2019 lawsuit against Microsoft and OpenAI, asking the court not to hand down a one-size-fits-all copyright ruling on AI training. In the filing, Wikimedia argues that training can, in some cases, count as transformative fair use, even in a case focused on generative … Continue reading “Wikimedia warns in new filing: ChatGPT ruling could hurt the open web”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":9350,"featured_media":382616,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","wpcf-pageviews":0},"categories":[1015],"tags":[],"usertag":[],"vertical":[],"content-category":[6771],"class_list":["post-382617","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news","content-category-ai"],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t