UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
`--------------------------------------------------------------x
`IN RE:
`
`OPENAI, INC.,
`COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT LITIGATION,
`
`
`This Document Relates To:
`23-cv-11195
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`
`
`25-md-3143 (SHS) (OTW)
`
`
`ORDER
`
`--------------------------------------------------------------x
`ONA T. WANG, United States Magistrate Judge:
`The Court has scheduled a separate conference to discuss OpenAI’s deletion of certain
`output log data, with timelines for supplemental briefing. (See ECF 32). The deletion of the
`output log data was first raised with the Court in January 2025 and discussed at the January 22,
`2025, conference. (See 23-cv-11195, ECF 379); (23-cv-8292, ECF 327, “Tr. Jan. 22, 2025”).1
`Based on the colloquy at the conference, I denied the News Plaintiffs’ request for “wholesale
`preservation of the output log data.” (See 23-cv-11195, ECF 441 at 2). But, I asked:
`Is there a way to segregate the data for the users that have
`expressly asked for their chat logs to be deleted, or is there a way
`to anonymize in such a way that their privacy concerns are
`addressed... what’s the legal issue here about why you can’t, as
`opposed to why you would not?
`(Tr. Jan. 22, 2025, at 40). OpenAI expressed a reluctance for a “carte blanche, preserve
`everything request,” (Id. at 41), and raised not only user preferences and requests, but also
`“numerous privacy laws and regulations throughout the country and the world that also
`
`1 The transcript for the January 22, 2025, discovery status conference that took place before me is currently
`located at 23-cv-8292, ECF No. 327, and 24-cv-00084, ECF 135. The docket text incorrectly states that the January
`22 conference took place before Judge Stein.
`Case 1:23-cv-11195-SHS-OTW Document 551 Filed 05/13/25 Page 1 of 2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`contemplate these type of deletion requests or that users have these types of abilities.”
`(Id. at 42).
`The Court has reviewed the News Plaintiffs’ renewal of their request for an order
`directing OpenAI to preserve all output log data on a going forward basis, (see ECF 29); (see also
`23-cv-11195, ECF 483), and even OpenAI’s latest responses do not represent whether they have
`taken—or would take—steps to preserve and segregate the output log data that has been
`marked or requested for deletion, absent a court order. (23-cv-11195, ECF 491). Moreover,
`while the colloquy at the January 22 conference focused on the “many, many billions of
`conversations that are retained,” (Tr. Jan. 22, 2025, at 37), the News Plaintiffs’ supplemental
`letter suggests that the volume of deleted conversations is significant. (ECF 29).2
`Accordingly, OpenAI is NOW DIRECTED to preserve and segregate all output log data
`that would otherwise be deleted on a going forward basis until further order of the Court (in
`essence, the output log data that OpenAI has been destroying), whether such data might be
`deleted at a user’s request or because of “numerous privacy laws and regulations” that might
`require OpenAI to do so.
`SO ORDERED.
`
` s/ Ona T. Wang
`Dated: May 13, 2025
`New York, New York
` Ona T. Wang
`United States Magistrate Judge
`
`2 OpenAI has also represented to the Court that a “fraction of ChatGPT Free, Pro, and Plus conversations … have
`not been retained” as a result of their “default” policy of retention. (23-cv-11195, ECF 491); (Tr. Jan. 22, 2025, at
`37). While OpenAI does not elaborate on the meaning of the word “fraction” in this context, Plaintiffs ’
`supplemental letter does.
`Case 1:23-cv-11195-SHS-OTW Document 551 Filed 05/13/25 Page 2 of 2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`