OpenAI accuses NYT of hacking ChatGPT

The two references to "hacking" in the Background section are not references to any of the grounds for dismissing any claims of the complaint.

The fact that defendants counsel is referencing evidence that will come out later in discovery seems to suggest the defendant expects the case to survive dismissal.

Some of the lines in the Backgound section of this memo look like they came straight from the client, unedited.

Are regular people going to be accused of hacking if they do something similar to what NYT did? This is a bad precedent to set moving forward.

That's dumb, they really shouldn't defend themselves that way. Given how free form ChatGPT interaction is and plus they're basically looking for their own work.