Joining an army of other plaintiffs suing OpenAI for alleged copyright infringement, the dictionary has now filed a complaint. Two of the world’s most recognized reference institutions, Encyclopedia Britannica and its subsidiary Merriam-Webster, have filed a federal copyright lawsuit against OpenAI in Manhattan. It alleges the unauthorized use of their human-researched, fact-checked content to train AI models, without permission or compensation.
Copyright Infringement Allegations
The complaint claims OpenAI scraped nearly 100,000 Britannica articles for model training, with ChatGPT responses frequently reproducing or closely paraphrasing encyclopedia entries and dictionary definitions. The suit also alleges OpenAI employs a retrieval-augmented generation system to pull Britannica content in real time during response generation.
Business Impact
Beyond training data, the publishers argue that ChatGPT functionally replaces visits to their websites. They state that this cuts into the subscription and advertising revenue that sustains their content operations.
The publishers warn that this triggers a damaging cycle — less revenue leads to lower-quality content, which generates even less revenue.
Trademark Concerns
The lawsuit also raises trademark claims. It states that ChatGPT allegedly generates fabricated information under Britannica’s name and displays incomplete excerpts in ways that imply the company’s endorsement.
Concrete Evidence
The complaint cites striking examples. ChatGPT reproduced Merriam-Webster’s exact definition of “plagiarize,” and replicated Britannica’s specific selection and ordering of quotes about the Hamilton-Burr duel. This mirrors the editorial judgment of human curators.
Seeking an Injunction and Damages
The plaintiffs are pursuing monetary damages alongside a permanent injunction to stop the alleged violations. OpenAI, as in other cases, defended its practices by citing fair use and publicly available data.
Ongoing Battle of Copyright Law vs. AI Training Practices
Encyclopedia Britannica’s suit joins a rapidly expanding wave of copyright litigation from publishers, authors, and news organizations. This includes a separate Britannica case against Perplexity AI. These continuing actions signal intensifying legal pressure on AI companies over their training data practices.