Photo via 404 Media

‘Doom Loop’: OpenAI and Microsoft Admits LLMs Are Destroying the Web and Built on Theft

Read the original at 404 Media ↗
Cite

Koebler, J. (2026, September 17). ‘Doom Loop’: OpenAI and Microsoft Admits LLMs Are Destroying the Web and Built on Theft. 404 Media. https://www.404media.co/doom-loop-openai-and-microsoft-admits-llms-are-destroying-the-web-and-built-on-theft/

Dated when The Aporia collected the article, usually within hours of publication. Check the original for its exact date and byline.

404 Media · collected 2026-09-17 · by Jason Koebler

Quick Summary

Lawyers for The New York Times have unsealed an internal Microsoft document in a long-standing copyright lawsuit against OpenAI, revealing executives admit large language models (LLMs) are built on stolen content and represent a significant threat to human labor. These LLMs create what the document calls a "doom loop," where AI steals content from creators, cannibalizes their traffic, and destroys their business models, effectively undermining the entire web ecosystem. The filing includes statements describing this practice as both an unprecedented theft of intellectual property and a massive devaluation of human labor in creative fields.
Written by AI on 2026-10-02, from this article's own text only (the story summary below draws on all the coverage).

AI analysis

Story summary

In a recent court filing unsealed in Manhattan federal court, executives from OpenAI and its major investor Microsoft admitted that large language models (LLMs) are undermining news publishers' business models through what they call a "doom loop." This loop involves LLMs using vast amounts of copyrighted content without permission, which then cannibalizes readership and revenue for the original publishers. An internal Microsoft document states this is an "unusual situation where an end-product threatens the economic foundations of its essential suppliers."

Executives like Brent Hecht, director of applied science at Microsoft, warned that AI models could harm both internet integrity and their own business by undermining news outlets’ sustainability. This admission comes as part of a long-running copyright infringement lawsuit filed by The New York Times against the companies over unauthorized use of copyrighted content for training LLMs like ChatGPT. The court documents reveal executives' private concerns that scraping millions of articles without consent amounts to "the largest theft of labor in human history." Despite these internal fears, Microsoft and OpenAI continue to defend their practices publicly by arguing they are protected under fair use laws since the AI transforms original content into new material.

Written for “AI Impact on Web Copyright” on 2026-11-01, grounded in this article and the 5 other(s) covering the same event.

Story

📰 AI Impact on Web Copyright
Technology · 6 article(s) covering the same event. Compare every outlet's account →

Compared with similar articles

This article reads leans strongly left and hedges 5% of its claims. Each row says how that neighbour differs.
Washington Examiner
⚖️ Leans left further right than this Hedges 3 of 15 claims Outlet record 70/100
New York Post
⚖️ Leans left further right than this Hedges 3 of 4 claims Outlet record 66/100
NBC News
Hedges 5 of 24 claims Outlet record 60/100
“The articles describe different statements made by AI executives at separate times, not a single specific incident.”
September 13, 2026 Different event
Letters from an American
⚖️ Leans left further right than this Hedges 10 of 65 claims
“Article A discusses Dario Amodei's essay about AI advancement and safety concerns, while Article B covers statements made by executives at Microsoft and OpenAI regarding the impact of large language models.”
The Straits Times
⚖️ Leans left further right than this Hedges 3 of 21 claims Outlet record 66/100
New York Post
Hedges 4 of 21 claims Outlet record 66/100
The Straits Times
⚖️ Leans left further right than this Hedges 1 of 1 claims Outlet record 66/100
New York Post
Hedges 1 of 30 claims Outlet record 66/100
“The articles discuss different aspects of AI technology and its implications, not the same specific incident.”
The Independent
⚖️ Leans left further right than this Hedges 2 of 13 claims Outlet record 59/100
“The articles describe different legal actions against AI companies: one about admitting harmful effects of LLMs and theft (court filing in New York), and another about an alleged illegal agreement to slow down AI development (lawsuit filed in California).”
Washington Examiner
⚖️ Leans strongly left Hedges 3 of 71 claims Outlet record 70/100
“The articles discuss different aspects of AI and LLMs without describing the same specific incident or occurrence.”
How this article was measured signals, leaning charts, publisher record, byline, topics and claims

Signals How these are calculated →

Claims extracted
20
sentences that state something as happening or true
Uncertain
5%
1 of 20 hedged ("reportedly", "may", "according to")
Leaning
Leans strongly left
of the writing, not the subject · beta estimate
Publisher signals
95/100
404 Media's corrections and hedging, across everything collected from it. Not a measure of accuracy.
Outlets on this story
6
Technology
Same framing elsewhere
1
articles that frame the event the way this one does
Analyzed 2026-09-18 · how these are computed

How this is being covered How these are calculated →

Article leaning vs. publisher reliability
Source leaning vs. consistency

Publisher

404 Media · 177 article(s) · 0 correction(s) detected
No corrections detected for this publisher. That may mean careful reporting, or simply that nothing has been checked.

Who wrote this

Jason Koebler
25 article(s) here · 1 carrying a prediction
🔮 But if you're in the EU or UK, you might be in luck and can object to that use of your data, as some users have pointed out.
2026-10-28 · assertive framing · Objection, your honor
🔮 “But there’s a lot of work associated with maintaining software so there may be a lot of instances where the software may not be reliable enough to use—I don’t know how many companies are going to be adopting these clones.”
🔮 In fact, with a small amount of Googling and/or clicking around social media, it is easy to find out everything you would ever need to know about the robot and what happened here.
🔮 Hill's decision will not set a binding precedent and there are several other cases throughout the nation considering the legality of warrantless ALPR searches.
🔮 Humoring the idea that LLMs are or could be conscious is a third-rail topic among many people who study and criticize AI.
🔮 “We will not add facial recognition to our devices,” Flock CEO Garrett Langley said in a recent video.
2026-09-29 · assertive framing · Surveillance Finds a Way
🔮 As Flock continues to be the center of a nationwide conversation about automatic license plate reading cameras, the company has said that it doesn’t, and won’t, do facial recognition: “We will not add facial recognition to our devices,” Flock CEO Garrett Langley said in a recent video.
🔮 “You may,” the judge says.
🔮 Last week, Meta executives announced that its much-hyped AI agent, Muse, had a new feature: It could call businesses for you to do things like make a restaurant reservation or a haircut appointment.
🔮 “Millions of people around the world will soon consider large models ‘hoovering up’ all their work to be an astonishing theft of unprecedented proportions,” an internal Microsoft document cited in the case read, adding “almost no one intended for content they created to be used in this fashion, nor are they compensated for its use.”
Also by Jason Koebler
Objection, your honor
2026-10-28 · 404 Media
The Staples Gift Card Heist
2026-10-19 · 404 Media
Nothing else under this byline is closely related to this article, so these are simply their most recent.
All 25 articles by Jason Koebler →

Topics

Digital Content Next Microsoft New York Times OpenAI the New York Times

Subjects

Microsoft ORG · 10× OpenAI ORG · 7× the New York Times ORG · 3× Bing PERSON · 1× Digital Content Next ORG · 1× Jason Kint PERSON · 1× Kint PERSON · 1× LLM ORG · 1× New York Times ORG · 1× Satya Nadella PERSON · 1×

Narrative

The court filing cites an internal Microsoft document that found that AI products steal from human content creators, then cannibalize clicks from the people and websites they’ve stolen from, thereby destroying their business models. “Our AI content strategy has started a ‘doom loop’ that will hurt the performance of our models and the entire web at the same time: It is highly unusual that an end-product threatens the economic foundations of its essential suppliers, but that is the situation we have created for our LLM business with respect to its ‘content supply chain,’” the document said.
framing: assertive · carried by 1 article(s) · first seen 2026-09-18
🔮 “Millions of people around the world will soon consider large models ‘hoovering up’ all their work to be an astonishing theft of unprecedented proportions,” an internal Microsoft document cited in the case read, adding “almost no one intended for content they created to be used in this fashion, nor are they compensated for its use.”

Claims (20 extracted, 1 hedged)

Executives working on AI at Microsoft and OpenAI admitted what its critics have been saying all along: Large language models are predatory pieces of technology that have been built on what a Microsoft executive called “an astonishing theft of unprecedented proportions,” and the “largest theft of labor in human history.” asserted
executive → work → history
An internal Microsoft document said generative AI products have created a “doom loop” that is killing “the entire web.” asserted
that → say → web
Those statements and a series of other mask-off moments feature heavily in an unredacted court filing that was unsealed Thursday in the behemoth New York Times vs OpenAI copyright lawsuit that has been winding its way through the court system for years. asserted
that → mask → years
In a filing asking for summary judgment (basically, a filing with the court asking it to rule), lawyers for the New York Times laid out a series of admissions made by Microsoft and OpenAI executives in documents and depositions that until now had remained either sealed or redacted at the request of Microsoft and OpenAI. asserted
that → ask → Microsoft
It’s easy to see why the AI companies wanted to hide this from the public. asserted
companies → ’ → public
The statements, taken together, are some of the most damning indictments of the ways LLMs were trained, how they worked, and the immediate threat they pose to human labor. asserted
they → take → labor
It is a reminder that even as AI becomes more powerful and companies try to shift the narrative to the supposed existential risk of “superintelligent” AI, the tools they have already built were created by stealing from human creativity and labor and are by definition existential threats to the human labor market. asserted
they → become → market
“Millions of people around the world will soon consider large models ‘hoovering up’ all their work to be an astonishing theft of unprecedented proportions,” an internal Microsoft document cited in the case read, adding “almost no one intended for content they created to be used in this fashion, nor are they compensated for its use.” asserted
they → consider → use
The filing was written by lawyers for the New York Times but is largely comprised of statements and interviews with big tech executives that admit both that LLMs are largely trained on stolen content, that they represent an existential risk for the human writers, artists, and media companies that they stole from, and that their products have started a “doom loop” that is eating the web and destroying the businesses that these companies stole from. asserted
companies → write → that
The unredacted filing was found by Jason Kint, the CEO of Digital Content Next, a trade organization that represents digital media companies. asserted
that → find → companies
Kint has been closely following and posting about massive AI copyright lawsuits. asserted
Kint → follow → lawsuits
The court filing cites an internal Microsoft document that found that AI products steal from human content creators, then cannibalize clicks from the people and websites they’ve stolen from, thereby destroying their business models. “Our AI content strategy has started a ‘doom loop’ that will hurt the performance of our models and the entire web at the same time: It is highly unusual that an end-product threatens the economic foundations of its essential suppliers, but that is the situation we have created for our LLM business with respect to its ‘content supply chain,’” the document said. asserted
document → cite → chain
Microsoft executives, including CEO Satya Nadella, testified under oath that after ripping content from the New York Times and other news sites, clicks to those news sites fully cratered, falling by more than 90 percent on Bing. asserted
clicks → include → Bing
Documents obtained during the court proceedings found that OpenAI created “a hack to get around nytimes paywall,” to which OpenAI cofounder Greg Brockman said “ah, nice.” asserted
Brockman → obtain → which
Microsoft executive Brent Hecht wrote that LLMs steal content “without ways of distributing economic value down the supply chain, [which] necessarily threatens the economic stability of those who create the content.” asserted
who → write → content
OpenAI’s policy director Jack Clark wrote that the company was “creating systems that substitute for the labor of the people that define the ‘culture’ of society” and Microsoft, in a policy document, wrote that generative AI could “significantly disrupt the employment of the very people who generated the data on which the foundation model was trained […] LLMs are a product that destroys its supply chain.” uncertain
that → write → chain
OpenAI called itself an “existential threat” to news publishers, and an OpenAI software engineer testified that “no matter how prominently we show the links, users won’t click.” asserted
users → call → links
None of this is at all surprising to anyone who has been paying attention to the development of generative artificial intelligence, but the document, taken in whole, is a real they-admit-it situation. asserted
they → pay → it
OpenAI’s and Microsoft’s lawyers have been trying to argue that their model training is fair use and transformative under copyright law and that they are building something that is fundamentally different from the human labor that it was trained on. asserted
it → try → that
But internally, these executives know that what they have built has been built on stolen content and that the products they’ve made are cannibalizing the sources they’ve stolen from and destroying the internet as we know it. asserted
we → know → it
💬Give feedback
🕘History 🎫Support