[pritambarhate]

May be because you are not OpenAI user. I am. I find it useful and I pay for it. I don't want my data to be retained beyond what's promised in the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.

I don't think the Judge is equipped to handle this case if they don't understand how their order jeopardies the privacy of millions of users worldwide who don't even care about NYT's content or bypassing their paywalls.

[conartist6]

You live on a pirate ship. You have no right to ignore the ethics and law of that just because you could be hurt in conflict related to piracy

[DrillShopper]

The OpenAI Privacy Policy specifically allows them to keep data as required by law.

[mmooss]

> who don't even care about NYT's content or bypassing their paywalls.

Whether or not you care is not relevant, and is usually the case for customers. If a drug company resold an expensive cancer drug without IP, you might say 'their order jeopardies the health of millions of users worldwide who don't even care about Drug Co's IP.

If the NYT is right - I can only guess - then you are benefitting from the NYT IP. Why should you get that without their consent and for free - because you don't care?

> (jeapordizes)

... is a strong word. I don't see much risk - the NYT isn't going to de-anonymize users and report on them, or sell the data (which probably would be illegal). They want to see if their content is being used.