AP TechnologyQwen · 实盘不做把握 2/10不做原因:无可交易标的
北京时间·源无时间·以抓取为准·⟳ 抓取 15:23:53·⚡ 决策 09-04 15:28:10 +4m17s·53.2 天前
美国司法部提交法庭文件支持OpenAI在《纽约时报》版权诉讼中的'合理使用'抗辩
主要受益方OpenAI为非上市公司,无任何公开交易证券;公开市场代理标的(MSFT、NYT)的materiality不足以支撑短线交易——一份amicus brief是程序性法律文件而非最终判决,案件自2023年12月持续至今,市场已充分知悉版权争议;NYT股价无异常反应(-0.92%属正常波动),做空置信度不足(法院不一定采纳DOJ立场)。
📄 原文AP Technology↗ 原文
Trump administration backs OpenAI in New York Times’ copyright case over training of chatbots
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration is wading into a legal fight between OpenAI and the New York Times, backing…
不做 OpenAI(非上市)(N/A)
OpenAI为非上市公司,无任何公开交易证券(direct_instrument_candidates确认无候选、无ADR、无单股杠杆产品)。主要受益方不可交易。
不做 纽约时报(NYT.US)
DOJ支持对方立场偏负面,但仅为程序性amicus brief而非判决,案件自2023年12月持续至今远未结束。做空不满足红线:催化不够强(法院不一定采纳DOJ立场),置信度不足4。9月3日NYT仅跌-0.92%无异常反应,市场未视为重大利空。消息9月2日已广泛传播,无新鲜度edge。
不做 微软(MSFT.US)
微软作为OpenAI最大投资方间接受益,但市值约3.8万亿美元,一份amicus brief对短期股价无实质增量。案件远未判决,法律结果高度不确定,无法量化对微软的财务影响。
展开详情(成交明细 / 研究档案 / 原文全文 / 决策记录链)
研究档案
结论摘要
美国司法部9月2日在NYT诉OpenAI版权案中提交amicus brief支持'合理使用'抗辩。主要受益方OpenAI为非上市公司,无任何可交易证券。公开代理标的中,微软(约3.8万亿美元市值)和纽约时报(约50亿美元市值)均无法从一份程序性法律文件中获得短线交易edge:案件自2023年12月持续至今,市场已充分知悉;NYT股价9月3日仅跌-0.92%无异常反应;法院是否采纳DOJ立场高度不确定。该消息9月2日已在社交媒体广泛传播,至9月4日AP报道时已非新鲜信息。
主要风险
- 若法院最终采纳DOJ'合理使用'立场,可能对内容类公司(包括NYT)的AI版权诉讼策略产生实质性负面影响,但目前仅为程序性文件,远未到达判决阶段
反向证据
- 做空前查反向 · 来源 kb_search · 日期 2026-09-02 · 影响 invalidates
DOJ文件9月2日提交当日即在社交媒体广泛传播;9月3日NYT股价仅跌-0.92%,无异常放量或恐慌性下跌,表明市场未将此视为重大利空。做空NYT的催化强度不足:法院不一定采纳DOJ立场,案件远未结束。
检索:NYT copyright lawsuit DOJ amicus brief market reaction 原文 ↗ - 做多前查反向 · 来源 kb_search · 日期 2026-05-06 · 影响 invalidates
NYT 10-Q确认诉讼自2023年12月持续至今,案件仍在早期阶段。对微软3.8万亿美元市值而言,一份amicus brief不改变任何近期财务预期,materiality极低。
检索:MSFT OpenAI copyright fair use benefit materiality 原文 ↗
先例如何影响了这次决策
对本次决策的影响:先例缺失不影响本次AVOID结论——核心原因是无可交易资产和materiality不足,而非先例不支持
方向:无高相似先例可用。AI版权诉讼是全新法律领域,尚无判决先例;amicus brief在诉讼中的市场反应缺乏可参考的历史样本。
涨幅量级:无法校准幅度,无同市场同机制先例
形态:无法判断是否存在见光死模式
工具执行结果 · 成功 5 · 降级 0 · 失败 0 · 取消 0
- search_processed_events 成功 stock_tools HTTP · 729 ms
{"result": "search_processed_events:agent query=`doj openai copyright fair use | justice department new york times openai | trump administration ai copyright amicus brief`;结构化索引覆盖完整 72 小时;旧记录兼容扫描近 71.8/72 小时、7461 条本臂决策(完整),返回 0 条候选。未命中只表示这些 agent query 表达式没有召回候选,不能据此证明消息首发或不是重复;按当前事件继续正常研判。"} - direct_instrument_candidates 成功 stock_tools HTTP · 89 ms
{ - stock_quote 成功 stock_tools HTTP · 773 ms
{ - stock_quote 成功 stock_tools HTTP · 149 ms
{ - kb_search 成功 stock_tools HTTP · 3,356 ms
{
原文全文
展开原文 · 3,940 字
Trump administration backs OpenAI in New York Times’ copyright case over training of chatbots
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration is wading into a legal fight between OpenAI and the New York Times, backing the ChatGPT-maker’s argument in a closely watched case over how it builds its AI technology by ingesting and processing millions of news articles.
In court papers filed Tuesday, the Justice Department supported OpenAI’s argument that training its models on troves of writings found on the internet is protected by the “fair use” doctrine of copyright law.
The Justice Department wrote that “the creative possibilities and public benefits” of training large language models on such content “far outweigh any competitive harm.”
It told the court that siding with The New York Times and other publishers who argue OpenAI’s practice violates copyright law would thwart “creative and scientific progress while hindering American prosperity and economic mobility.”
“The entire reason that AI models are rapidly reshaping the economy and national security is that they help people, including those working in creative fields, make things and get things done,” Justice Department attorneys wrote. The “creative benefits often overlap with national security interests,” the department added, because AI models can “help national security officials analyze and draw inferences from (unprotected) real-world facts such as those conveyed in New York Times articles.”
The Times criticizes the government’s position
The lawsuit, and the government’s involvement in it, are symptoms of something happening all over the world, particularly in recent months: the rush to keep up with the rapid rise of AI tools over the past five years. In many cases, disputes about AI and its practices are winding their way through courts that still lack precedents — and in some cases language — to match the subject matter.
The New York Times said Wednesday that the administration “is siding with a handful of trillion-dollar AI companies at the expense of the countless American creators whose work they stole.”
“Both AI and creators can thrive — AI companies simply need to pay fairly for the content that makes their products possible, as copyright law requires,” Graham James, a spokesperson for the paper, said in an emailed statement. “The Administration’s proposal to let companies take that content without permission or compensation would undermine the sustainability of the human-created content that a healthy society depends on, and which AI needs to function.”
The New York Times says OpenAI threatens its financial livelihood
The Times sued OpenAI in 2023, arguing that the company was threatening its journalists’ livelihoods by effectively stealing billions of dollars’ worth of their work, in some cases spitting out The Times’ material verbatim to people seeking answers from generative artificial intelligence like ChatGPT. The threat to news publications became even more apparent when, in 2024, Google introduced AI-generated summaries at the top of online search results, cutting off the advertising dollars that come when people click a link to the information’s original source.
The Times has since been joined by other news organizations, including MediaNews Group-owned newspapers the New York Daily News and the Chicago Tribune, digital media publisher Ziff Davis and the nonprofit Center for Investigative Reporting. The company has been sued by several writers — including comedian Sarah Silverman — who say their books were ingested to train OpenAI’s AI models without their permission.
The Times’ arguments differ from those brought by book authors. In its original lawsuit and an amended complaint filed earlier this year, it focused on the unfair competition of companies that “seek to free-ride on The Times’s massive investment in its journalism by using it to build substitutive products without permission or payment.”
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration is wading into a legal fight between OpenAI and the New York Times, backing the ChatGPT-maker’s argument in a closely watched case over how it builds its AI technology by ingesting and processing millions of news articles.
In court papers filed Tuesday, the Justice Department supported OpenAI’s argument that training its models on troves of writings found on the internet is protected by the “fair use” doctrine of copyright law.
The Justice Department wrote that “the creative possibilities and public benefits” of training large language models on such content “far outweigh any competitive harm.”
It told the court that siding with The New York Times and other publishers who argue OpenAI’s practice violates copyright law would thwart “creative and scientific progress while hindering American prosperity and economic mobility.”
“The entire reason that AI models are rapidly reshaping the economy and national security is that they help people, including those working in creative fields, make things and get things done,” Justice Department attorneys wrote. The “creative benefits often overlap with national security interests,” the department added, because AI models can “help national security officials analyze and draw inferences from (unprotected) real-world facts such as those conveyed in New York Times articles.”
The Times criticizes the government’s position
The lawsuit, and the government’s involvement in it, are symptoms of something happening all over the world, particularly in recent months: the rush to keep up with the rapid rise of AI tools over the past five years. In many cases, disputes about AI and its practices are winding their way through courts that still lack precedents — and in some cases language — to match the subject matter.
The New York Times said Wednesday that the administration “is siding with a handful of trillion-dollar AI companies at the expense of the countless American creators whose work they stole.”
“Both AI and creators can thrive — AI companies simply need to pay fairly for the content that makes their products possible, as copyright law requires,” Graham James, a spokesperson for the paper, said in an emailed statement. “The Administration’s proposal to let companies take that content without permission or compensation would undermine the sustainability of the human-created content that a healthy society depends on, and which AI needs to function.”
The New York Times says OpenAI threatens its financial livelihood
The Times sued OpenAI in 2023, arguing that the company was threatening its journalists’ livelihoods by effectively stealing billions of dollars’ worth of their work, in some cases spitting out The Times’ material verbatim to people seeking answers from generative artificial intelligence like ChatGPT. The threat to news publications became even more apparent when, in 2024, Google introduced AI-generated summaries at the top of online search results, cutting off the advertising dollars that come when people click a link to the information’s original source.
The Times has since been joined by other news organizations, including MediaNews Group-owned newspapers the New York Daily News and the Chicago Tribune, digital media publisher Ziff Davis and the nonprofit Center for Investigative Reporting. The company has been sued by several writers — including comedian Sarah Silverman — who say their books were ingested to train OpenAI’s AI models without their permission.
The Times’ arguments differ from those brought by book authors. In its original lawsuit and an amended complaint filed earlier this year, it focused on the unfair competition of companies that “seek to free-ride on The Times’s massive investment in its journalism by using it to build substitutive products without permission or payment.”
决策记录链 · 只追加
每次领取产生一条记录,重新决策追加一条并以 supersedes 指向被替代的记录(ADR 0014)。
这条决策早于决策账本(2026-10-08 起逐条追加),没有追加记录。