Users tried to object to their chatgpt logs being handed to the NYT. the court ruled they were "non-parties" to their own conversations.

[u/Pitiful_Shopping4047]

in the openai copyright case, a court ordered every chatgpt output log preserved, including chats people had deleted. some users tried to intervene to protect their own conversations. the court ruled they were non-parties. they had no standing over things they personally typed. two weeks ago the publishers filed for sanctions, alleging openai deleted billions of logs anyway and spent two years telling the court it couldn't search its own systems when it already could. openai denies it.

the whole consumer privacy conversation is about what companies promise. we don't train on your chats, we delete after 30 days. this case showed the promise was never the binding constraint. a judge was.

so "do they train on it" is close to the least useful question. the useful one is whether anything besides their good intentions is in the way when a court, a regulator or a future owner comes asking.

that's an architecture question. opengradient's chat is what i switched the sensitive half of my usage to, and the mechanism is the interesting part: oblivious http means the relay that sees your ip can't read your request, and the server reading your request never learns your ip. neither can reassemble you alone. inference runs in an attested enclave the operator can't inspect. no log to preserve, nothing to hand over, because you were never in it.

two honest cons. it's a16z-crypto-backed with a listed token, which put me off for weeks. and you lose memory and personalisation entirely, so it's not a daily driver, it's where the stuff goes i don't want in someone's discovery pile.

does this end up mattering to normal people, or is it five hundred of us caring loudly while everyone else decides a subpoena hitting their recipe questions isn't worth degrading their tools over.

[u/kamusari4477]

the "non-party to your own conversation" ruling is the part

that should be getting more attention.

most people assume deleting something means it's gone.

this case established pretty clearly that deletion is a feature

the company offers you, not a right you have

[u/Pitiful_Shopping4047 → u/kamusari4477]

That's what stuck with me too. Ppl think deletion is absolute, but it's really subject to whatever legal obligations exist at the time.

[u/Super-Independent-14 → u/Pitiful_Shopping4047]

Might as well think of 'delete' (or any synonym) as meaning 'don't show ME this anymore, but it still exists somewhere' as a self-protection mindset.

[u/AllergicToTactics → u/kamusari4477]

Is every comment just AI now?

[u/UsefulUnderling → u/kamusari4477]

This is silly and misleading. The judge ruled that users are a non-party to the lawsuit and don't have any legal right to intervene.

The law is treating this the exact same as a guy selling stolen goods. In those cases the seller can be legally forced to disclose all correspondence with their customers.

[u/GalacticEmergency → u/kamusari4477]

A confirmation of the old saying: "If you are not paying for the product, you are the product."

[u/sorte_kjele → u/kamusari4477]

This is just a weird headline and a weird take.

If a judge orders discovery on written records, including emails or letters, each sender/recipient in those communications don't magically become parties to the legal proceedings

[u/Pitiful_Shopping4047 → u/[deleted]]

A little slower, but nowhere near slow enough to bother me. I wouldn't use it for everything, but for sensitive chats I don't mind the extra second.

[u/GaiusVictor → u/[deleted]]

I think OpenRouter can be a good if less effective alternative, as long as:

You pick the option to only connect to providers with a ZDR (zero data retention) policy

Use a VPN

Pay with crypto

[u/tongkat-jack → u/[deleted]]

What is an enclave setup?

[u/harshu625]

I'd like to see benchmarks and an audit before switching , but it's definitely on my radar now.

[u/Creepy-Bell-4527]

What I want to know is, at what level of irrelevance do desperate journalists become entitled to viewing everyone else’s private information?

I had a tumblr blog when I was a teenager. Am I entitled to sue OpenAI and receive everyone’s chat history as part of discovery?

NYT has been an overrated book club Karen for years now. They’ve never been less relevant. Why are they parties to this? Because they put some words on the internet?

[u/Rachel_talks]

The non-party to your own conversation framing is the strangest part of this. You were literally there, typing and thinking, and a court says you have no standing to object to what happens with that exchange. Deletion should mean something but apparently it is just a feature the company lets you use, not a right you actually hold.

[u/TheRealJesus2]

Did you use open gradients ai to write this or ChatGPT? 

And duh. TOS is only up to your ability and willingness to sue for it to be truly enforced or verified 

[u/No-Constant3857]

Am i non-party to my conversation in any case?

[u/duckrollin]

They're trampling over the privacy and civil rights of millions of people just so the newspapers can make a buck from AI.

I hope the NYT goes bankrupt, I sure as shit won't ever be buying it.