CounterpediaExplore knowledge. Follow the sources.
NO-S03Canonical identity resolved

S.D.N.Y. Rule 12(b)(6) opinion

This page reverses the citation: it shows how a source is carried into the admitted NYT/OpenAI record, which exact retained capture is associated with it, and the boundary on what that relationship establishes.

Record role

judicial treatment

This dismissal-stage ruling (NO-S03) addresses pleading sufficiency under Rule 12(b)(6) for certain claims; the fair-use merits question is not addressed by this procedural ruling.

Bound content block
no-s03-quote
Attribution
The New York Times Company v. Microsoft Corporation and OpenAI, S.D.N.Y., ECF No. 514 (Rule 12(b)(6) Opinion)
Claim-support refs in admitted composition
0

Retained research capture

Acquisition source id
src_593dff9213322bf9a2b28de9bb7c2a8e
Capture id
cap_d30e3a27-9a75-401a-8130-6147e4d89d5c
Captured bytes
sha256:1944d092241e989…1dce592587
Capture receipt
sha256:a61ae57ec3814a7…e78286efad
Open captured/public source ↗Inspect this Check (ECF-514) →

What this establishes

  • The admitted record references this exact semantic source ref.
  • A retained Acquisition capture is associated with that ref by the displayed research binding, with exact capture and digest facts preserved.
  • A committed governed crosswalk resolves the displayed Counterpedia↔Acquisition source identity.
  • The admitted record carries the semantic source ref as procedural judicial treatment, bound to the identified content block.

What this does not establish

  • A retained research capture association is not by itself a governed canonical source-identity crosswalk.
  • Source presence or quotation is not a ClaimSupportEdge and does not itself establish factual truth.
  • Exact captured bytes do not establish source authenticity or signature validity.
  • An unresolved Counterpedia↔Acquisition crosswalk does not mean the retained source is absent.
  • The procedural ruling does not establish a merits holding that OpenAI's training was lawful fair use.

Continue through the record

Back to the full NYT/OpenAI record →Read the case question →Test the graph connection →Find other OpenAI records →
Inspect source-bound authority context
Semantic source ref
source:nyt-openai:no-s03-judicial-opinion
Canonical identity state
RESOLVED
Admission authority over record consequence
counterpedia.intake-authority/v1

The admission authority shown here governs the admitted record consequence. It is not presented as source authority, source authenticity, or canonical source-identity authority.

Associated entries

1 associated entry

Association is not the same as citation, support, admission, or verification. A corpus target listed here has been judged by a governed owner-class writer to materially belong to that entry’s documentary record, on a stated documentary role and relevance basis. It does not establish, confirm, cite, or back any statement made in that entry, and it carries no admission, standing, or authenticity finding.