No, you cannot join the USA Today lawsuit against OpenAI. The case was filed only by USA Today Co.
(Gannett's publishing arm) and 13 affiliated newspaper entities as a corporate copyright action, not a class action, so there is no mechanism for an individual reader, freelancer, or subscriber to sign on as a plaintiff, according to Editor & Publisher. The suit, filed October 8, 2026, in the Southern District of New York, accuses OpenAI of copying the publishers' journalism to train its AI models without permission, as reported by Forbes. The rest of this page explains who is actually involved, what they are seeking, and where a reader with a similar grievance might look instead.
Official resources:
- Read the original research from Lawcommentary — Use this page to review the original research.
- Read the official notice from Editorandpublisher — Use this primary source to verify the official announcement.
Table of Contents
- Who Is Actually Suing OpenAI
- Why This Isn't a Class Action You Can Join
- What the Lawsuit Is Actually Seeking
- Is There Any Class Action You Could Join?
- What to Do If You Have a Similar Grievance
- Frequently Asked Questions
Who Is Actually Suing OpenAI
USA Today Co. and 13 affiliated newspaper entities brought the case, covering roughly 18 to 19 affiliated publications under the Gannett umbrella, according to Forbes.
The complaint names seven OpenAI entities as defendants. The plaintiffs allege OpenAI copied more than 160,000 articles from the publishers' websites into its WebText training dataset, including 83,266 articles taken directly from usatoday.com, plus roughly 122 million tokens of text drawn through a separate dataset called C4, as detailed by The Desk. This is a dispute between media companies and an AI developer, not a consumer-facing claims process.
Why This Isn't a Class Action You Can Join
A class action lets a large group of similarly situated people share in one lawsuit's outcome, typically through an opt-in or opt-out process that a court approves. USA Today's case against OpenAI is not built that way. It is a direct corporate copyright suit brought by named plaintiffs only, with no sign-up page, opt-in form, or class-certification motion anywhere in the filing, according to Editor & Publisher.
That means freelance contributors whose work appeared in these papers, subscribers, or other publishers with similar complaints cannot attach their own claims to this case. If their work was separately scraped or used by OpenAI, they would need to file an individual claim of their own. The case is reportedly being filed as related to an existing, consolidated multidistrict litigation in the same New York federal court that already includes The New York Times, the New York Daily News, and other publishers suing OpenAI and Microsoft since December 2023, according to mlex.com. That consolidation groups similar corporate plaintiffs together for efficiency in court; it still does not open a door for the public to join.
What the Lawsuit Is Actually Seeking
The plaintiffs are asking for more than $250 million in damages, a jury trial, and a court order forcing OpenAI to destroy any GPT models and training datasets built using their copyrighted journalism, according to Law Commentary. That destruction request goes further than a typical damages claim, since it targets the AI models themselves rather than just seeking payment. The complaint also includes a separate claim under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), alleging OpenAI stripped copyright-management information, such as author credits and licensing notices, from the articles before using them, according to The Desk. That is a distinct legal theory from ordinary copyright infringement and can carry its own penalties if proven.
This lawsuit also doesn't start from a blank slate. In the related earlier litigation involving The New York Times and other publishers, U.S. District Judge Sidney Stein ruled in March 2025 that most of the publishers' core copyright claims could proceed to discovery and trial, rejecting OpenAI's and Microsoft's attempt to dismiss the bulk of the case on fair-use grounds, according to giga.law. That ruling gives USA Today's related claims a measure of precedent in the same court.
Is There Any Class Action You Could Join?
Yes, but it covers a different category of work. Authors Guild et al. v.
OpenAI is a genuine class action, filed in September 2023 in the same Southern District of New York court by the law firm Lieff Cabraser and others, according to the Lieff Cabraser case page. That case concerns book manuscripts written by novelists and nonfiction authors, not newspaper articles, and it has no connection to the USA Today suit. If a reader's own writing, such as a published book, was used to train OpenAI's models without permission, the Authors Guild case is the relevant one to watch, not the USA Today litigation. The two cases involve different plaintiffs, different types of copyrighted material, and different legal teams.
What to Do If You Have a Similar Grievance
Someone with a copyright complaint against OpenAI, such as a freelance writer or blogger whose articles may have been scraped for AI training, has two realistic paths, according to the Lieff Cabraser case page: As of the filing, OpenAI had not publicly commented on the USA Today lawsuit, according to Editor & Publisher. No settlement, fund, or claims process tied to this case exists for the public to track at this stage.
- File an individual copyright claim, since the USA Today case accepts no outside plaintiffs.
- Watch for a distinct class action that matches the type of work involved, such as the Authors Guild case for book authors, rather than assuming any newspaper-related suit covers unrelated writing.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does the USA Today lawsuit cover other Gannett newspapers besides USA Today?
Yes, it covers USA Today Co. plus 13 affiliated newspaper entities, spanning roughly 18 to 19 publications, according to Forbes.
Is the USA Today case connected to The New York Times' lawsuit against OpenAI?
It is being filed as related to the same consolidated multidistrict litigation in the Southern District of New York that includes the Times' case, according to mlex.com, though each publisher's claims remain separate.
What should a freelance journalist do if their articles were used to train AI without permission?
They cannot join the USA Today suit; they would need to pursue an individual claim or watch for a class action that matches their type of work, per the Lieff Cabraser case page.